LIBRARY 

OK    TMK 

l»RI.\CETO]%,  X.J. 

IxtNATIOX    OF 

I  SAM  I    1:K    ACi  N  K\V, 

..1      y  II  !  1.  \  I'K  1.  H  H  I  \.     HA. 

J.rtter      5   *C^  ^^  / 


<^.aA..^^^^* 


BX'  9422     .C3    1827 

Campbell,  Alexander,  1788- 

1866. 
The  Christian-preacher 


sec 


THE 

CHRISTIAN  PREACHEM; 

INTENDED 

TO  DETECT  ERROR, 

AND  TO 

EXHIBIT  JIJVD  BEFEJ^D  TRUTH, 

ON    THE 

Difficult  and  disputed  doctrines,  connected  with 
the  controversy 

BETWEEW 

ARMINIANISM  AND  CALVINISM; 

AND  IN  WHrCH 

The  Two  Systems 

ARE 
RECTIFIED  AND  RECONCILED 

BY 
ALEXANDER  CAMrBELL, 

POPLARTOWN,  WORCESTER  COUNTY,  MD, 


COPY  RIGHT  SECURED  ACCORDING  TO  LAW. 


PRINTED  BY  A.  M.  SCHEE, 
DOVER,  DEL. 

1827—8. 


PREFACE. 

The  centre  of  Calvinism  is  the  absolute  Sovereignty 
of  God;  and  that  of  Arminianism  the  love  of  the  Creator 
to  all  mankind.  These  principles  appear  equally  sus- 
tained by  the  authority  of  the  Bible.  That  God  rules 
in  the  armies  of  heaven,  and  worketh  all  things  after  the 
counsel  of  his  own  will;  and  that  he  loves  the  world,  and 
is  not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  appear  to  be  doc- 
trines, equally  Scriptural  and  therefore,  equally  entitled 
to  belief.  Convinced  of  this,  and  fully  believing,  that  the 
testimony  of  the  Spirit  of  truth,- must  be  always  consis- 
tent with  itself,  the  writer  of  these  sheets,  has  been  in- 
duced to  pursue  the  enquiry,  whether  these  propo- 
sitions are  not  the  different  pillars  of  the  same  temple 
and  therefore,  perfectly,  and  demonstrably,  reconcile- 
able  with  each  other.  The  residt  of  this  enquiry 
is  given  in  the  following  discourses.  None  of  them 
were  ever  delivered  in  the  pulpit  as  they  are  here  exhi- 
bited; and  with  one  or  two  exceptions,  nothing  resem- 
bling them.  A  thorough  discussion  of  these  subjects, 
naturally  requiring  a  chain  of  speculations  too  abstract 
for  the  edification  of  the  generality  of  hearers,  these 
same  principles,  when  preached,  have  appeared  in  less 
argumentative,  but  in  more  popular  and  practical  forms. 
The  remarks  appended  to  some  of  these  sermons,  may 
to  many,  and  especially,  to  those  unacquainted  with  the 
facts  from  which  they  arose,  appear  to  be  unduly  severe. 
If  it  be  so  however,  the  writer,  after  a  calm  retrospec- 
tion of  several  months,  with  all  the  circumstances  of 
the  case  before  him,  is  still  in  an  error.  The  attack, 
which  they  aie  intended  to  repel,  was  personal^  and 
consisted  in  odious  abuse^  and  the  most  u^qiiaUfn^d 
fakchood,  and  was  made,  not  on  the  res^^onsibility  of  an 
i.idi.i.JuaU  but  was  supported  by  the  authority  of  the 
whole  conference  of  Philadelphia. 

It  was  also  circulated  in  the  most  public  manner,  and 
with  an  evident  intention  as  far  as  |.>ossible  to  prostiate 
the  relinriou?  influence  of  an  iuf^ividi'al.  located  in  the 
heart  of  a  comm'inity,  where  the  a-.i«hority  of  Hi'-.  Con- 
fereuce  could  obtain  an  extensive  credence,  for  any 


IV 

thing  which  they  might  choose  to  publish.  No  evi- 
dence has  as  yet  appeared  to  prove,  that  any  thing  un- 
triie^  or  mistaken^  has  been  introduced  into  the  remarks. 
If  such  circumstances  did  not  require,  that  the  sword 
of  truth,  should  be  wielded  for  the  full  execution  of  its 
piercing  and  cutting  powers,  it  is  difficvdt  to  say  when 
there  could  be  such  a  demand.  After  having  repelled 
the  foe,  and  defended  the  citadel,  the  writer  wishes  to 
obey  the  command,  Love  your  enemies.  He  never 
wished  them  any  thing  worse^  than  that  they  should  be 
better  men.  And  his  sincere  prayer  now,  is,  that  the 
Ignorance  and  depravity  so  manifest  in  the  movers  and 
the  conductors  of  that  attack,  may  be  healed  by  divine 
grace,  and  forgiven  by  divine  mercy. 

Almost  from  the  commencement  of  this  work  the 
Editor  has  resided  at  a  distance  from  the  press.  Some- 
times he  could  give  the  proof  sheet  a  slight  inspection, 
and  at  other  times  none.  Typographical  errors  are 
more  numerous  than  could  be  wished.  It  is  however 
hoped,  that  by  the  assistance  of  the  errata,  the  meaning 
will  in  no  case  be  mistaken. 

At  some  future  time  the  subjects  of  this  volume  may 
be  pursued  further. 

That  the  time  may  soon  come,  when  the  watchmen  on 
Zion's  walls,  shall  see  eye  to  eye;  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus  shine  over  the  whole  earth  like  the  sun;  and  all 
flesh  see  the  salvation  of  God,  is  the  sincere  prayer  of 

THE  AUTHOR. 


CONTENTS, 

Sermon,  Pa<^e. 

I.   Calvinis7n  and  Arminianism  rectified  and 
reconciled  j 

I.  Thess.  V.  21 — Prove  all  things;  hold  fast  that 
which  is  good. 

II.  Comiyig  to  Christ  33_ 
John  V.  40 — Ye  will  not  come  unto  me  that  ye 

might  have  life. 

III.  Why  men  do  not  come  to  Christ  49. 
John  V.  40 — Ye  will  not  come  unto  me  that  ye 

might  have  life. 

IV.  The  cause  and  the  design  of  God's  giving  his  Son  73, 
John  III,  16 — For  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he 

gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  on  him^  might  not  perish,  but  have  e- 
verlasting  life. 

V.  The  government  of  God  97. 
Ps.  XCVil,  1 — The  Lord  reigneth;  let  the  earth 

rejoice;  let  the  multitude  of  the  isles  be  glad 
thereof. 

VI.  The  fall  of  man  121. 
Gen.  Ill,  6. — And  when  the  woman  saw  that  the 

tree  was  good  for  food,  and  that  it  was  pleasant  to 
the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one 
wise,  she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof,  and  did  eat, 
and  gave  also  unto  her  husband  with  her,  and  he 
did  eat. 

VII.  The  same  subject  continued  153. 

VIII.  The  best  possible  system  169. 
Isaiah  XLVI,  10 — My  counsel  shall  stand,  and  I 

will  do  all  my  pleasure. 
Ps.  V.  4 — For  thou  art  not  a  God,  that  hath  plea- 
sure in  wickedness;  neither  can  evil  dwell  with  thee. 

IX.  The  same  subject  continued  193. 

X.  Bible  Election  233. 
I.  Pet.  I,  1,  2 — Peter  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ  to 

strangers,  scattered  throughout  Pontiis,  Galatia, 
Cappadocia,  Asia,  and  Bithynia,  ELECT  accor- 
ding to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the  Father, 
through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit  unto  obedi- 
ence, and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ. 


VI 

XI.  The  efficacy  of  prayer  in  the  conversion  of  the 
loorld  257. 

Matt.  VI,  10 — Thy  kingdom  come.      Thy  will  be 
done  in  earth  as  it  is  in  heaven. 

XII.  Preaching  as  the  oracles  of  God  265. 
I.  Pet.  IV,  11 — If  any  man  speak,  let  him  speak 

as  the  oracles  of  God, 


£>The  copies  of  the  Christian  Preacher  now  on  hand, 
will  be  immediately  bound  in  boards  and  placed  for  sale 
in  the  hands  of  E.  Littell,  Esq.  No.  88  Chesnut-street, 
Philadelphia.  Any  wishing  to  obtain  the  work  will 
hereafter  apply  to  him. 


RECTIFIED  ^JSTD  EECOjyciLED. 

Prove  all  things;  holdfast  that  'which  is  good-— I   Thess.  V.  21, 


Man  is  endowed  with  reason  and  formed  for  immor- 
tality. And  as  the  proper  application  of  the  one,  pre- 
pares for  the  enjoyment  of  the  other;  the  Benificent  Cre- 
ator, ever  mindful  of  our  best  and  most  enduring  inte 
rests,  exhorts  us,  in  the  text,  to  the  legitimate  exercise 
of  our  rational  powers.  God  has  not  made  us  in  vain, 
nor  for  less  than  admirable  ends.  Man  may  not  inno- 
cently bury  his  rationality  under  a  bushel  or  in  the 
earth;  lie  down  on  the  couch  of  indolence,  permit  himself 
to  be  cast  forth  upon  the  stream  of  pt)pular  opinion,  and 
to  be  borne  heedlessly  along  by  the  current:  but  is  en- 
joined, in  the  authoritative  language  of  the  text,  to  prove 
all  things, — to  search  for  good  and  to  hold  it  fa-^t. 

'f  he  "all  things"  which  it  is  the  design  of  this  discourse 
to  prove,  are  the  two  great  systems  of  theology — Calvi- 
nism and  Armlnianism — and  the  good  to  be  sought  and 
held  fast,  a  more  reasonable  and  scriptural  system.  Iq 
this  order  the  subjects  lie  before  us — 

I.  The  Calvinian  and  Arminian  systems,  are  to  be 
proved.  In  the  days  of  the  Apostles  and  their  immedi- 
ate followers,  the  Saviour's  humble  and  unlettered  dis- 
ciples, believing  the  Gospel  to  be  the  gift  of  God,  impli- 
citly adopted  its  principles  and  its  precepts  as  true  and 
reasonable,  without  any  curious  or  scrupulous  enquiries 
about  the  systematical  agreement  of  its  doctrines.  If 
one  of  these  primitive  fathers  discoursed  on  one  class 
of  texts,  he  would  appear  Arminian,  and,  if  on  another, 
Calvinistic,  and  thus  to  modern  systema<izers,  his 
preaching  would  have  exhibited  all  the  apparent  contra- 
dictions, imagined  by  some  to  be  found  in  the  literul  in- 
terpretation of  the  ^icriptures,  whence  it  was  taken. 
But  soon  heretics  arose — subtle  minded  men,  who  em- 
ployed all  their  ingenuity  to  undermine  and  prostrate 
the  truth;  and  who  having  adopted  systems  formed  ac- 


cording  to  the  preconceptions  of  philosophy,  ^'falsely  so 
called,'^  would  balance  their  flimsy  fibncs  upon  the  let- 
ter of  a  single  texf;  and  wrest  and  torture  every  scrip- 
ture, which  their  narrow-minded  theology  could  not 
reach.  Then  it  became  necessary  for  the  advocates  of 
truth  to  study  system,  to  war  against  the  enemy  with 
bis  own  weapons,  and  upon  his  own  ground;  to  oppose 
reason  to  reason  and  phih>sophy  to  philosophy.  No- 
thing special  appears,  with  regard  to  the  two  leading 
systems,  that  now  divide  the  christian  church,  until  the 
fifth  century,  when  Polagius  arose  and  taught,  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  original  depravity  of  human  nature  and 
the  necessity  of  divine  grace  to  enlighten  the  understan- 
ding, and  purify  the  heart,  vvas  prejudicial  to  the  pro- 
gress of  holiness  and  virtue  and  tended  to  lull  mankind 
into  a  mischievous  and  fatal  security.  This  earth 
born  fire  kindled  in  the  self  righteousness  of  presump- 
tuous man,  finding  every  unrenewed  heart  a  magazine 
and  all  its  corruptions  powder,  so  soon  as  proposed,  shot 
forth  with  all  the  rapidity  of  the  electric  blaze  and  threa- 
tened fearful  desolation  to  the  whole  heritage  of  fxod. 
The  alarm  aroused  the  energies  of  Augii|tine,  pastor  at* 
the  church  at  Hippo  in  Africa,  who  |)ouied  upon  the 
world  such  torrents  of  reasoning  and  eloquence  as  sooa 
extinguished  the  spreading  conflagration.  Augustine 
was  probably  the  first  that  reduced  the  doctrines  now 
called  Calvinistic  into  a  system.  A  monk  by  the  name 
of  Cassian  with  several  others,  endeavoured  to  blend  to- 
gether the  doctrines  of  Augustine  and  Pelagius,  and 
formed  a  system  called  Semij)elagianism,  the  leading  fea- 
tures of  wliich  nearly  resembled  the  doctrines  afterwards 
adopted  by  James  Arminius.  Soon  after  this,  the  cloud 
of  popery  began  to  deepen  its  shades  and  hung  for  a 
succession  of  ages  over  the  church;  and  during  this  long 
lapse  of  super«titous  night,  these  doctrines  were  variously 
agitated,  until  Luther^  in  the  sixteenth  century,  commen- 
ced the  Heformation,  and  distinctly  taught  the'doctrines  of 
Augustine.  Aud  by  Calvin,  hi.^  distingushed  contempo- 
rary, these  doctrines  were  more  fully  explained  and  sys- 
tematized.    Tiie  sura  of  the  belief  of  these  great  6ienj 


on  the  subject  of  Election,  may  be  comprised  iri  the  fol- 
lowing woids'-Before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  God 
chose  a  certain  number  of  the  fallen  race  of  Adam'io  c^ 
terual  glory,  wjthout  any  foresight  of  faith,  good  works 
or  any  other  conditions,  performed  hy  the  Creature:  and 
the  rest  of  mankind,  he  was  pleased  to  pass  by  and  or- 
dain to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  their  sins,  and  to  the  praise 
of  his  vindictive  justice. 

In  the  year  1591,  James  Arminius,  who  had  been  educa 
ted  in  the  Calvinian  tenets^  and  then  professor  of  divinity 
in  the  university  of  Leyden,  becoming  dissatisfied  with 
the  rigid  doctrines  of  Calvin,  dissented  by  teaching 
"That  God  from  all  eternity  determined  to  btsto^v  sal 
vation  on  those  who  he  foresaw  would  persevere  unto 
the  end,  and  to  inflict  everlasting  punishment  on  those 
who  should  continue  in  their  unbelief  and  resist  the  di» 
vine  succours;  so  that  election  was  conditional,  and  rep- 
robation, in  like  manner,  the  result  of  foreseen  infidelity 
and  persevering  wickedness."^ 

Such  are  the  primary  articles  of  the  Calvinistic  and 
Arminian  creeds;  and,  as  tJiese  give  rise  to  most  of  the 
minor  differences,  their  other  peculiar  tenets  need  not 
be  introduced  into  this  discourse. 

Let  us  compare  these  leading  doctrines,  and  see  wherein 
they  agree  and  wherein  they  differ,  i'hey  are  alike  in 
supposing,  that  the  Bible  teaches,  that  God  chose  some 
and  passed  by  and  did  not  choose  others;  and  as  t!ie  Ar- 
minian admits  God's  eternal  foreknowledge,  and  main- 
tains, that  from  eternity,  he  determined  to  ^ayejnst  the 
number  which  he  foresaw  as  believing,  and  to  punish 
jMsi  the  number  which  he  foresaw  as  persisting  in  unbe- 
lief; according  to  his  creed  the  number  saved  and  the  num- 
ber lost  are  just  as  certain,  as  can  be  upon  Calvinistic 
principles.  Thus  far  Calvin,  and  Arminius  agier:  hoth 
admit  the  eternity  of  the  divine  foreknowledge,  and  the 
eternity  of  the  divine  choice.  Now.  wherein  cb)  they 
differ?— In  this;  Calvin  supposes  that  God  '^foresees  fu- 
ture events,  only  in  consequence  of  his  decree,  that  they 

*Sie  Buck's  Tlieoiogic*!  Diction^iTjr  and  Mosbeim's  Ecclesiastlol  History. 


shall  happen,''  f  and  Armiuius,  that  God  from  eternity 
determined  some  future  events  as  a  consequence  of  his 
foreknowledge  of  the  choosings  of  his  moral  creatures 
not  determined  at  all,  and,  consequently,  while  Calvin 
held,  that  God  determined  all  things,  Arrainius  belie- 
ved, that  the  choice  of  his  moral  creatures,  was  Uft  un- 
determined. But.  not  to  pursue  minor  differences,  the 
first  dividing  point  is,  Calvin  places  the  determinations 
of  God,  before  his  foreknowledge,  and  Arrainius,  his 
foreknowledge  before  his  determinations,  and,  though 
this  app3Ars  a  difference,  occasioned  by  the  splitting  of 
a  hair,  yet  it  has  filled  the  camp  of  the  Lord's  host  with 
the  shout  of  war  and  the  religious  Heavens  with  black- 
ness and  tempest. 

Both  systems  have  scriptural  truths,  scriptural  contra- 
dictions, and  philosophical  ditHcuUies.  Calvinism  gives 
a  rational  and  scriptural  display  of  Jehovah's  absolute 
supremacy,  wisdom,  and  power;  but  by  a  bold,  anti- 
scriptural  philosophy,  it  makes  the  decree  of  God,  which 
elects  some  men  to  salvation,  the  only  medium,  through 
which  the  heavenly  mercy  moves,  and  rears  the  decree 
of  reprobation,  as  a  dark  mountain  to  intercept  the  sun- 
shine of  love  and  to  cast  the  cold  and  deep  shades  of 
night  and  winter  over  the  non-elect  world.  And  it  ap- 
pears inconsistent  with  such  passages  of  scripture  as 
represent  God  as  willing  to  act  otherwise,  if  the  conduct 
of  mefi  had  been  different;  as  when  Christ  declares  bis 
willingness  to  gather  the  children  of  Jerusalem  together 
as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  if 
they  would  have  been  gathered.^-  Now  if  the  divine  pre- 
destination i«  understood  to  be  the  cause  of  their  choice, 
then  the  thing  supposed — their  willingnpss  to  be  ga- 
thered— was  an  absolute  impossibility — .just  as  much 
so,  as  to  reverse  the  decision  of  Jehovah's  immuta- 
ble wisdom:  and  if  the  Calvini'^t  say,  that  predestination 
had  no  influence  in  dictating  the  choice;  yet  if  their  de- 
strnrtion  associated  with  this  choice,  was  eternally  de- 
creed, still  a  question  naturally  arises,  would  a  different 

tCalvIn's  Institutes  book  III,  chapter  KXIII.  sec.  6.  •Matt.  XXII,  37^ 


choice  have  altered  GotVs  eternal  decision  in  rej>;ard  to 
their  future  state?  if  you  say  it  would  not,  thcTn  you 
literally  contradict  the  languas;e  of  the  text  uldcli  de- 
clares, ^'l  would"  hut  <'yp  would  not,"  and  if  you  say  it 
would,  you  then  surrender  the  philosophical  position  of 
Calvin,  that  God's  predestination  is  the  cause  of  his  fore- 
knowledge. And  the  same  reasoning  applies  to  all  that 
class  of  texts  to  which  this  belonsis.  Swh  are  the  diffi- 
culties to  which  the  grand  principle  of  Calvin,  that  God 
foreknows  because  he  first  predestinates,  naturally  and 
unavoidably  leads.  And  the  most  plausible  solution 
found  among  its  ablest  and  most  ingenious  advocates,  is, 
that  "it  is  an  incomprehensible  subject,  the  facts  are  to  be 
believed  but  not  to  be  explained — a  subject  on  which  it  is 
presumptuous  to  reason,  because  it  is  an  attempt  to  be 
wise  above  what  is  written."  With  my  reason  hewilde- 
red,  and  ray  Bible  contradicted,  1  go  to  the  Arniinian 
for  relief — he  points  me  to  a  system,  which  indeed  ap- 
pears to  exhibit  the  mercy  and  £;oodness,  and  even  the 
justice  of  God  in  a  grand  and  affecting  manner;  but  one 
which  presents  his  empire  as  a  "mighty  maze"  and, 
at  least  in  part  "without  a  plan" — one  which,  by  ma- 
king all  Jehovah's  decisions,  in  his  moral  universe,  rest 
on  the  character  and  conduct,  which  he  foresees  his  sub- 
jects will  choose,  exalts  the  capricious  free  will  of  the 
Creature  above  thrones  and  principalities  and  powers 
and  ''all  that  is  called  God,^^  or,  that  at  best,  supposes  tlie 
Almighty  placed  on  his  throne  like  the  vane  upon  the 
bouse  top,  liable  to  be  turned  to  an}'  point,  which  th« 
uncertain  choice  of  his  moral  subjects  may  chance  to  in- 
fluence— He  exhibits  to  me  as  an  alteruj^tive  for  Calvi- 
nism, a  system  which  affirms  that  God  fn»m  eternity- 
predestined  or  elected  some  men  to  everlastins;  life  on  the 
previous  knowledge  of  their  faith  and  holiness— hp- 
cause  he  saw  them  ''covformed  to  fhp  imai^cofhis  Son^ 
and  *'holy  and  laithout  blame  before  him  in  lore,'"  whilst 
the  Bible  declares,  that  God  pretlestifiated  men  not  be- 
cause he  foresaw  tl  em  already  ^'covformed  to  the  iwa^p  of 
his  Son/^  but  'Ho  be  conformed  to  the  ima^s^e  of  his  Son^,-' 
and  that  he  chose  raen  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 

•Rom,  vin,  29.  •         ' 


6 

not  because  he  foresaw  thera  previously  ^%oly  and  mth- 
out  blame  before  him  in  love,^^  but  that  tliey  "'should  be  ho- 
ly and  ivithout  blame  before  him  in  love,''^  buch  are  tlie 
philosophical  difficulties  aud  scriptural  contradictions  of 
this  alternate  scheine.  Aud  if  1  press  upon  its  a<lvocat6 
the  objections,  that  it  divests  God  of  his  wisdom  and 
makes  him  the  slave  of  his  creature's  choosings,  he  will 
follow  the  rigid  Calvinist  and  inform  me,  that  the  sub- 
jects, relating  to  the  divifie  foreknowledge  and  determi- 
nations are  awful  mysteries,  which  he  professes  not  to 
explain.  And  if  I  ask  him  what  those  srciptures  mean 
that  si)  literally  contradict  his  sy«;tem?  his  answer  a- 
mounts  to  this  ^» They  meafi  just  the  contray  to  the  let- 
ter of  tlie  sacred  text. — In  the  Bible  there  are  many 
things  hard  to  be  understood."  'I'lie  notorious  fact  is, 
vou  mav  reason  on  either  svstem  to  the  entire  satis- 
faction  of  its  ad\rocates^  until  you  come  to  the  defective 
and  unreasonable  parts,  and  then  they  will  warn  you  to 
stand  at  a  distance,  they  will  throw  around  it  a  mist  of 
mystery,  and  inform  you  that  the  ground  is  too  sacred 
to  be  trodden  by  the  feet  of  uuhallowed  reason.  Now 
is  this  exibitin:!;  a  system  of  divine  truth,  *<fair  as  the 
moon,  clear  as  the  sun  and  terrible  as  an  army  with  ban- 
ners?" When  men,  to  accommodate  their  favorite  systems, 
make  mysteries  where  Go»l  has  intended  there  should  be 
none,  they  create  a  thousand  infidels  for  every  mystery. 
These  two  great  systems  may  be  viewed  as  two  state- 
ly structures,  bnilt  with  stones  dug  out  of  the  quarry  of 
heaven,  and  eacli  fitted  by  the  divine  hand  for  a  parti- 
cular place  in  the  temple  of  God,  but  in  putting  together 
these  precious  and  lieaven-w  rought  materials,  the  buil- 
ders not  comprehending  the  complitatedness  of  the 
whole  fa!)ric,  frequently  take  a  stone  fitted  by  infinite 
wisdom  for  the  rear,  and  ])lace  it  in  the  front — a  stone 
finislied  for  the  corner,  antl  lay  it  in  the  centre,  and  one 
designed  for  the  fonndation,  and  elevate  it  to  the  top  of 
the  rorner,  and  when  you  point  then  to  an  unclosed 
joint  or  a  part  deformed  by  a  mislaid  stone,  they  fill  up 
the  vacuum  wjth  tiie  untempered  mortar  of  iiuman  in- 
vention, spread  over  it  the  varnish  of  mystery  aud  sup- 

♦Eph.  1.4. 


pose,  that  contrary  to  all  the  appearances  addressed  to 
the  human  eye,  there  are  still  existing,  a  fitness  and  a 
beauty  in  some  incomprehensihle  maunei",  which  they 
can  not  understand.      Calviiusni  is  an   edifice,  with  itH 
rear  and  its  ends,  wrought  with  a  workmanship,  thai; 
needeth    not    to   he  ashamed;  hut  with  some   untiltini; 
stones  and  an    unsightly  portico   in  front,  that  present  a 
forhiddins;  aspect   to  the  transient  multitude.     On  the 
contrary,  the  Arminian  system,  is  like  an  edifice  with  a 
well  garnished  and  imposing  front,  and  all   its  defects 
and  deformities,    thrown   into   the  rear,   entirely  out  of 
sight  of  mere  superficial  ohservers;  but  the  man  who  en 
ters  and  surveys  all  the  apartments  in  the  light  of  reason 
and  revelation,  will  find,  that  it   has  at   least  as  many 
difficulties   and   as   great  deformities  as  Calvinism,     If 
Calvinism  stands  in  stuhhorn  contradiction  to  some  plain 
and  positive  declarations  of  the  Great  God,  Arminian- 
isni  is  no  less  guilty  of  the  same  offence.     If  Calvinism 
by  the  decree  of  reprobation,  fails  to  exhibit  the  impar- 
tial infinitude  of  God's  love,  Arminianisn  by  proclaim 
ing  a  moral  universe  without  a  plan,  and  a  Supreme  Cre- 
ator, governed  on  his  throne  by  the  caprice  of  his  erring 
creatures — a  caprice  as  blind  as  chance  and  yet  as  irre- 
vocable as  fate — equally  fails  to  display  the  indepen- 
dence of  him  who  made  all  things  for  himself  and  the 
fulness  of  the  wisdom  of  the  only  wise  God.     If  Cal- 
vinism makes  God  a  tjjranP^  Arminiauism  makes  him 
a  slave.     In  short,  in  the  manner  in  which  these  systems 
are  usually  preached  and  explained,  whilst  they  both 
exhibit    much  precious  and  saving  truth,  they  are  e- 
ver  deficient   in  unfolding  certain   parts  of  the  perfec- 
tions of  the  Most  High  in  those  beauteous  proportions 
and  in  all  that  unsullied  glory  and    transcendant  gran- 
deur inwhich  they  are  displ  »yed  in  the  Bihle;  and  some 
parts  of  each  defy  all  the  ingenuity  of  man  to  reconcile 
them  with  others  of  the  same  scheme  and  with  any  thing 
less  than  a  forced  interpretation  of  many  texts  of  sacred 
writ.     Weighed  in  the  balance,  all  must  admit,  much 
in  both  is  found  wanting.     Let  us  now — 


*I  have  somewheie  seeu  a  remark  to    that  amount  made  by  Mr.  John 
Wesley, 


8 

II.  Proceed,  in  qoest  of  the  good  proposed  to  be 
sought — a  more  reasonable  and  scriptural  system.  The 
aduiissiuri  of  the  two  Ibllowing  propositions: 

J.  The  co--eterni*ij  of  the  divine  foreknowledge y  and 
divine  determinntions^  and, 

U.  That  God  has  adopted  the  best  possible  moral  sys- 
tem^  will  redeem  Christianity  from  all  her  Armiuian  and 
Calviiiian  difldculties. 

1.  The  co-eternity  of  the  divine  foreknowledge  and 
the  divine  determination.  Fhey  are  equally  eternal  ac- 
cording  to  the  scriptures — "Known  unto  God  are  all 
Jiig  works  from  the  beginnin:;  of  the  world''*— -Here  we 
have  his  eternal  foreknwledge.  Again.  '*As  he  bath  cho- 
sen us  before  the  foundation  of  the  world-'f  — Here  we 
have  his  eternal  determination  or  choice.  So  that,  the 
scriptures  do  not  teach  us,  that  God  from  all  eternity 
determined  to  save  men,  because  he  first  foresaw  their 
faith  and  good  works,  as  Arminius  believed,  nor  yet, 
that  from  all  eternity,  he  foresaw  their  salvation,  because 
he  had  first  determined  to  save  them,  as  Calvin  taught. 
And  this  truth  is  demonstrable  from  reason  as  well  as 
revelation.  If  from  eternity  Q:iH\  foreknew  all  things, 
then  it  follows  by  logical  consequence,  that  from  eter- 
nity he  determined  all  things.  Suppose  the  sutferings 
of  Christ  to  be  the  thing  foreknown.  If  he  foreknew 
these  sufli-rings.  then  according  to  our  ideas  of  I'ela- 
tions,  he  previously,  had  determined  to  send  his  Son 
into  the  world  and,*  that  he  slKmUl  be  invested  with  hu- 
manity; or  how  could  he.  have  foreseen  him  circumstan 
ced  or  qualified  to  suffer?  He  had  detf^rmined  to  create 
such  men  as  tiie  Jews,  the  High  Priest.  Pontius  Pilate, 
and  the  Soldiers;  or  how  could  he  have  foreseen  acru- 
sers.  judges  and  executionf»rs  by  whom  his  sufferings 
would  be  inflicted?  Anil  moreover,  he  had  also  deter- 
mined to  accept  his  sufferings  in  lieu  of  the  puni'.hment 
due  to  guilty  men;  or  it  would  seem  difficult  to  reconcile 
the  permission  of  the^e  suilvrings  with  the  wisdom  an.d 
clemency  of  a  wise  and  merciful  father— And,  above  all, 
the  foreknowledge  of  the  event,  proved  its  determina- 
tion certain:  !>erause  these  sufferings  were  the  voluntary 
act  of  the  Beinir  who  foreknew  thenv 

•Acts  XV,  18.    tEph.  ^'  ^- 


9 

And  again,  if  from  eternity  Grod  determined  all  thinais, 
from  eternity,  he  also  foreknew  them.  For  if  the  suf- 
ferings of  the  Saviour  be  the  event  determined,  then  ac- 
cording to  human  apprehension,  he  foresaw,  that  Christ 
would  come  into  the  world  and  be  invested  with  human- 
ity; or  otherwise  lie  would  have  determined  his  suffer- 
ings without  knowing,  that  he  would  certainly  be  cir- 
cumstanced or  qualified  to  suffer.  He  likewise  fore- 
knew, that  there  would  be  such  men  as  the  Jews,  the 
High  Priest,  Pontius  Pilate,  and  the  Soldiers,  and,  at 
that  particular  time,  they  would  be  disposed  to  accuse, 
condemn,  and  crucify  him;  or  otLerwise  he  would  have 
determined  his  sufferings  without  knowing  that  there 
would  be  instruments  disposed  and  qualified  to  be  aclors 
in  the  mournful  tragedy.  He  also  foreknew,  that  his 
sufferings  would  be  a  sacrifice  proper  to  be  su'^stituted 
for  the  punishment  of  sinful  men;  or  the  determination, 
that  he  must  suffer,  would  have  been  an  impeachment 
of  his  wdsdora  and  goodness.  And  last  «»f  all.  he  fore- 
knew them  as  possible;  or  he  would  not  have  determi- 
ned them  as  certain.  So  that  if  we  imagine  the  parts 
of  Grud's  universal  plan,  to  have  l^-en  formed  progres- 
sively in  his  mind,  according  to  the  succession  of  huniau 
operations,  we  find,  that  agreeably  to  our  conceptions,  his 
foreknowledge  and  his  determinations,  must  have  ac- 
companied each  other  and  have  been  interwoven  togeth- 
er from  beginning  to  end  in  the  whole  series  of  events; 
and  therefore,  must  have  been  eternally  coexistent;  and 
if  eternally  coexistent,  there  can  be  no  such  relation  be- 
tween them  as  cause  and  effect  or  as  antecedent  and  con- 
sequent.  And  as  we  cannot  conceive  the  one  to  exist, 
at  least  in  any  succession  of  acts,  without  the  other, 
there  must  be  a  necessary  relation  t)etween  tlieiii;  but  as 
it  has  been  proved  that  there  can  be  between  them  no 
such  relation  as  cause  and  effect,  or  antecedent  and  con- 
seauent,  the  relation  between  them  must  be  that  of 
agreement  and  coincidence  only,  because  connected  with 
the  subject  now  under  consideration,  ng  other  is  possible. 


10 

And  again,  althous;h  wheu  actually  contemplating  the 
operations  of  the  divine  mind,  the  narrowness  of  ouv 
understandings,  forbi(]s  us  to  view  them  in  any  i)ther  man- 
ner, than  as  consecutive  acts,  just  as  we  would  separate- 
ly and  in  succession,  the  parts  of  a  vast  and  complica- 
ted engine;  yet,  wiien  we  have  done  contemplating  these 
acts  consecutively,  we  ouglit  to  conceive  them  all  per- 
formed at  once,  by  one  simple  operation  of  the  divine 
intellect,  just  as  we  would  imagine  the  whole  plan  of  a 
vast  and  complicated  machine,  to  he  formed  by  some 
master  mind,  without  any  reasoning,  by  a  simple  intui- 
tive eftort.*  Now,  if  at  once  by  a  simple  prescience, 
without  beginning  or  succession,  God  from  eternity 
knew  all  things,  if  at  once  by  a  similar  determination, 
be  decreed  all  things,  and  if  his  determinations  and  his 
foreknowledge,  as  lias  been  proved,  are  coeval  and  co- 
eternal,  then,  in  our  a^iprehension,  there  can  be  no  other 
relation  betw  eeu  them  but  that  of  agreement  and  coinci- 
dence. And  then  by  reason,  as  well  as  by  revelation, 
'^ve  arc  conducted  to  the  conclusion,  that  Armiiiius  was 
mistaken,  wheu  he  taught,  that  Grod  from  eternity  de- 
termined to  save,  or  to  punish  according  to  belief  or  infi- 
delity previously  foreseen;  and  Calvin,  when  he  sup- 
posed, that  God  foresaw  the  salvation  of  the  elect  and 
the  perdition  of  the  reprobate,  only  because,  he  had 
previously  determined  their  respective  destinies. 

Now,  if  God's  eternal  determinations  are  not  the 
causes  nor  even  the  antecedents  of  his  foreknowledge, 
and,  if  the  relation  between  his  prescience  and  his  pur- 
pose, be  only  that  of  agreement  and  coincidence,  then 
be  may  have  created,  and  may  now  govern  the  universe 
according  to  an  eternal  and  determinate  plan,  and  yet, 
his  determinations  in  thi*^  ])lan,  not  be  the  cause  of  any 
of  the  sinful  choosiiigs  of  his  creatures.  It  may  how- 
ever he  imagined,  that  this  view  of  the  subject,  places 
the  voliti(ms  of  creatures  beyond  the  control  of  the  King 
of  the  universe,  as  much  as  the  Arminian  theory,  and, 
if  not  quite  so  inconsistent  with  any  plan;  yet  presents 


^See  note  A. 


11 

us  only  a  plan  of  coin.cidence  with  the  free  agency  of 
the  creature,  which  is  surrendering  at  once  the  truth 
that  ought  to  lie  at  the  foundation  of  every  tlieological 
theory,  '^liat  the  Heavens  do  rule''*— ^^The  Lord 
reigneth"t  and  ^-doeth  according  to  his  will  in  the  ar- 
mies of  heaven  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth. "J 
But  this  objection  will  appear  entirely  imaginary  if  it 
may  be  true,  that  this  coincidence  be  such  that  the 
choosings  of  the  creatures,  make  a  part  of  this  plan. 
And,  that  it  may  be  true,  will  appear  from  a  sciiptural 
survey  of  God's  moral  system. 

I'o  constitute  a  moral  agent,  four  things  are  requisite 
—first,  a  law  by  which  "to  be  regulated.     But  to  be 
moved  onwards  in  the  path  prescribed  by  this  law  with 
out  any  personal  choice,  or  to  be  torn  from  it  by  some 
extraneous  power,   would  involve  no  more  morality  or 
immorality,  than   the  revolutions,   or  the  aberrations  of 
a  planet,  or  the  orderly   or  disorderly   movenicnts  of  a 
mill;  and  hence,  secondly,  to  constitute  a  moral  being — 
since  morality  implies  accountability —he  must  be  en- 
dued with  a  natural  liberty,  that  in  the  language  of  our 
Confession  of  Faith,  '^is  neither  forced  nor  by  any  abso- 
lute necessity  of  nature  determined  to  gnocl  or  evil."|| 
And,  thirdly,  since  moral  agency  involves  the  idea  of 
actiyity  in  reference  to  good  or  evil,  the  threatened  pe- 
nalties of  transgression  and   the  promised  rewards  of  o- 
bedieuce,  must  be  addressed  to  him  as  motives  to  intlu- 
ence  him  to  act  in  conformity  to  the  law  suited  to  his 
nature  and  given  for  his  guide.     But  as  these  motives 
would  be  entirely  ineffectual,  if  met  by  no  correspon- 
ding principle  in  the  breast  of  the  beius;  to  whom  they 
are  a(Mres«*ed;  it  is,  fourthly,  necessary,  that  in  every 
accountable  being,   there  should   be  a  moral  sense — a 
principle  producine;  as   a  consequence  of  obedience  the 
feeling  of  approbation,  and  as  a  consequence  of  i\i<o- 
bedience  the  sting  of  remorse,  to  give  power  to  law  and 
efficiency  to  motives.     Hence  we  bee,  that  natural  liber- 

*  Dan.  IV,  26.     jPs.  XCVI,  10.     |Dan.  IV,  35. 
iJConfession  of  Failh,  chap.  IX,  sec.  1. 


12 

ty  constitutes  an  essontial  part  in  a  moral  system,  and, 
constH]ac?itly,  any  system  in  whicli  there  is  no   natural 
liberty,  cannot  be  a   moral   system*       But   a  system  in 
which  there  is  no  plan,  is  but  a  system  of  confusion — of 
mishaps  anvl  contradictions — and  if  so,  any  moral  sys- 
tem under  an   all  knowing,  wise,    powerful,  and    good 
God,  mu^t  be  one  in  which  there  are  both  natural  liber- 
ty and  a  defiidte  and  well  ordered  plan.     It  must  there- 
fore l)e  possible  for  na-ural  liberty  to  exist  in   a  well  or- 
dered plan.     And  as  natural  liberty  consists  in  choosing 
and  acting  acccnding  to  choice,  it  is  possible  that    choo- 
sing and  acting  according   to    choice  should  i.xist  in  a 
system  all  the  events  of  which  happen  according  to  order 
and  ceriainty.      Hoth  must  be  true,  because  the  ^5crip- 
turps  declare,  that  God    ^^worketh   all  things   after  the 
counsel  of  his  own  will*'*  and  yet  they  permit  no  man 
to  say,  "'l  am  tempted  of  God/'*t     But  to  aid  our  con- 
ceptions; suppose  all  the  different  orders  of  moral  beings 
througiiout  the  whole  empire  of  God,  as  so  many  bran- 
ches of  one  tree — a  tree  that  spreads  its  boughs  to  the 
most  distant  worlds  and  rears  its  top  to  the  summit  of 
creation;  and  say,  every  limb  is  free  to  choose  and  act; 
and  in  agref^ment  with  this  choice  and  conduct,  is  its  in- 
terminable destiny.     Now  imagine^  that  G«kI  before  he 
formed  this  tree  knew  how  every  branch  would  use  or 
abuse  that  natural  liberty,  which  has  just  been  shown 
to  be  essential  to  a  moral  being — how    many  and  what 
ones  would  choose  death  and  wither  for  amputation  and 
Imrnins;,  and  how   many  and  what  ones  would  choose 
lile  and  bloom  for  glory  and  immortality;  and  how  he, 
as  the  most  wise  and  powerful  husbandman,  must  treat 
each   limb  and  leaf  in  correspondence    vvith   the  choice 
which  he  views   as  certain  if  he   should  determine   to 
raise  this  tree  into   existence.       Here    the  whole   tree, 
with  all  its  branches  and  their  choosings,   and  his  own 
righteous  treatment  of  every  shoot,  would  be  contempla- 
te<l  in  his  plan.     Also  imagine,  that  after  mature  deli- 
beration, he   determines  to  rear  this  tree,  and  thus  to 


•Eph,  I,  11.     tJames  1, 13. 


13 

adopt  this  p!an.     And  last  of  all,  contemplate  God's 
survey  of  ibe  moral  universe,  reprei-entcM!  in  (his  Uce, 
before  we  suppose   it    adopted— his   foreknowledge   of 
the  choice  of  every  branch,  his  permissicm  of  the  natu- 
ral liberty  of  thatch<»ice,  and  every  other  deteimirialiou 
in  the  whole  plan,  as  coexistent,  and  coetenia!;  ani!,  as 
one  simple  intuitive  act;  and  you  have  iny  view  s  of  the 
liberty  and  the  plan  of  God's  mcual  empire— how  *'the 
Lord  rei8;neth,"  and   '•doeth  his  will  in   tlie  armies  of 
heaven  and  among  (he   inhabitants   of  the  earth,''  and 
yet,  leaves  men  and  angels  free..    Now  this  illustraticm, 
if  properly  apprehended,  brinj2;s  all  the  free  acts  of  the 
creature  within  the  ran2;e  <»f  God's   government;  so  far 
as  it  is  possible  for  such  acts  to  be  the  sidyects  of  govern- 
ment beyond  the  agents  that  produce  them.     Thny  Imve 
been  viewed  as  contemplated  in  his  plan;  and  as  depen- 
dant on  his  sovereign  will  for  the  agents  and  the  natu- 
ral liberty  from  which  they  derived  their  existence.     It 
was  his  Supreme  determination,  all  consequences  wise- 
ly considered,  to  permit  their  occurence.     And  if  with 
the  whole  system  before    him — all   its  tendencies  and 
events  surveyed— the  choosings  of  every  agent  and  his 
own  coincidental  determinations — wHh    power  to  reject 
if  he  wisely  thought  it  best,  it  was  his  pleasure  to  adopt 
it  as  he  saw  it  was,  and   as  he  foresaw  it  would  be.  to 
say.  that  this  is  not  working  all  things  after  the  counsel 
ofhis  own  will,   is  to  suppose,   that  it  cannot  be  the 
counsel  of  his  will,  that  his  creatures  sbnuhl  in  any  case 
enjoy  the  liberty  of  choice;  and  as  this  lil>erty  is  essen- 
tial to  a  moral  system,  it   is  to  suppose   fliat  I)<  ity  can 
not  reign  consistently  with  the  existence  t)f  amoral  sys- 
tem.    And  this  is  deemed  sufficient  to  obviate  any  ob- 
jection, that  may  be  urged  agaii.st  the  tlieory  exhibited 
in  this  discourse,  as  militating,  in  whole  or  in  part,  a- 
gainst  any  scriptural  disjday  of  God's  sovereignty. 

rhus  in  perfect  cnnsistefjcy  with  the  absolute  supre- 
macy of  Jehovah,  we  see  how  it  may  be  true  of  all  the 
guilty  sons  and  daughters  of  Adam,  as  of  I'^rael  of  old, 
they  destroy  themselves.     But  we  may  again  be  met  by 


1^ 

an  objector,  who  will  probablv  say,  ^^True  your  des- 
criptivHi  of  the  moral  system  illustrates  the  manner  in 
which  God  may  have  predestinated  all  things  and  yet 
man  he  free;  hut,  if  man's  making  this  fatal  choice  and 
incurrhig  the  vvoful  destiny,  make,  as  you  teach,  a  part 
of  this  plan,  how  can  it  he  true,  that  be  has  no  pleasure 
in  the  death  of  the  wicked?  And  if  from  eternity  he 
foresaw,  tiiat  a  certain  number  of  his  creatures  won  hi 
choo«i«  tji«  road  to  death,  and  if  at  the  same  time  he  de- 
creed to  them  the  natural  liberty  of  making  this  choice 
— thus  permitting  tiieir  destruction  to  make  part  of  his 
plan,  how  can  he  desirt*,  that  all  men  should  be  saved? 
And  how  could  he  weep  over  unbelieving  Jerusalem, 
if  he  permitted  their  sin  and  destruction  to  make  a  part 
of  his  purpose?  And  since  it  makes  a  part  of  his  plan 
to  let  some  men  be  lost,  how  does  he  wisely  and  sincere- 
ly offer  the  fxospel  to  all  men?''  rhough  these  are  objec- 
tions frequently,  and  loudly  urged  by  Arminians  against 
Calvinists,  yet  they  may.  in  a  little  different  shape,  be 
just  as  forcibly  urj;ed  againsj;  themselves.  For  if  from 
eternity  God  i^(»reknew  all  things,  as  Arminius  supposes 
— bcf»)re  he  made  man,  what  man  would  certainly  do — 
wlio  among  his  falh^n  generations  would  neglect  his 
calls;  and,  on  his  foresight  of  their  disobedience,  deter- 
mined from  all  eternity  to  sink  them  to  the  deeps  of 
yynv;  it  mny  be  plausibly  objected,  that  God  must  de- 
light in  the  misery  of  the  wicked;  or,  in  full  view  of 
tlif^ir  dis(»bedience  and  death,  he  would  never  hav» 
made  them  any  part  of  the  divine  workmanship.  How 
can  it  be  true,  that  God  wdl  have  all  men  to  be  saved, 
since  on  the  foresight  of  their  iniquity  he  determined  to 
destruction  a  part  of  the  human  kind  before  they  were 
b(-rn?  And  since  he  knows,  that  some  men  will  not  obey 
the  Gospel;  autl  as  a  consequence  ot  this  foreseen  disobe- 
dience, he  had  determined,before  he  gave  them  existence 
to  punish  th«*m  forever;  how  can  he  sin«  erely,  and  wisely, 
offer  the  Gospel  to  all  men?  And  in  short,  if  from  eter- 
nal  ;^ges  he  foresaw,  thnt  if  he  did  create  some  men,  they 
would  die  impenitent,  and  be  lost,  why,  unless  he  hadi 


15 

pleasure   in  their  sins  or  in  their  miseries,  did  he  £;ive 
them  being?    These  are  ultScuUies    that  the  Aiiniiiiau 
ought  to  lemove  from  his  own  system,  before  he  |)ro- 
iiouuces  Calvinism  cruel.     'They  are  consecjnences,  that 
apparently  cling  to  both  systems.     The  piiocipal  dif- 
ference IS,  that  in  Calvinism,  tliey  appear  in  front;   bu^ 
in  Arminianism  in  the  rear,  throvi'n  out  of  the  sii;;ht  of 
mere  passers  by  and  superficial  observers;  but  glaringly 
visible  to  the  eye  that  surveys   the   whole  scheme,  and 
follows  out  its  consecpjences.     'The  Arminian,  standing 
at  the  front  of  Calvin's   temple,  surveyin2;  the   doctrine 
of  reprobation,  hung  over  the  door,  exclaims  "horrible! 
horrible!'' — whilst  rhe  Calvinisf,  admitting  its  apparent- 
ly frowning  and  forbidding  features;  but  believing  its 
existence  scriptural  and  its  origin  divine,  responds  '*mys- 
tery!  mystery!".     But  if  you  take  the  Arminian  by  the 
band  and  conduct  him  to  the  rear  of  his  own  temple,  and 
ask   him  how    much   softer  are  the  features  of  his  own 
doctrine,  which  supposes,  tliat  God  from  all  eiernity  de- 
termined to  doom  unborn  millions  to  eternal  chains  and 
eternal  burnings;  for  the  sins  of  which  he  foresaw  they 
would  certainly  be  guilty,  if  he  gave  them  beiiig? — and 
how  much  milder  does  it   appear  in  the   Almighty,   to 
create  them,   determining  to  damn   them  for  their  sins 
foreseen,  as  a  certain  consequence  of  their  creation,  as 
his  creed  supposes:^  or  to  create  them,  determining  to 
damn  them  for  their  sins  permissively  decieed.  as  the 
Calvioist  believes?  He  will  answer,   '^that    though  this 
appears  to  be  the  consequence  of  his  doctrine;  yet  he 
disavows  it;  and,  that  the   subject  of  tiie  divine  presci- 
ence is  surrounded  with  mystery"— That  is,   in  other 
words,  it  appears  logically  to  be  so;  but  in  some  mv^^^'- 
rious  manner^  which  he  cannot  explain,  it  cavinot  be  so! 
And  thus,  whilst  the  Calvinist  admits  the  doctrine  of  re- 
probation to  appear  awfully  severe;  but  beciu'^e  he  re- 
ceives it  as  the  truth  ofCiod,  supposes  that  in  s(»me  mys- 
terious manner  it  must  be  like  its  author,  mild  and  mer- 
ciful;— The  Arminian  acknowledges,  that  almost  the 


*See  note  B, 


16 

same  kind  of  reprobation  appears  to  arise  out  of  his  doc- 
trine; but  because  it  seems  harsh  and  contrary  to  his  views 
of  the  mercy  of  God,  he  imai];i!ies,  that  in  some  mysterious 
manner  it  only  appears  to  be^  but  cannot  be  really  true; 
;ind  thus  each  places  the  mystery  where  it  seems  best 
in  his  own  eyes.  IMiese  are  (iiiliculties,  which  candid 
and  intelli2;ent  men,  honestly  attached  to  both  theories, 
must  see  and  must  feel:  for  it  is  .generally  found,  that  a 
man  of  mind  and  reflection  sufficient  to  examine  and 
compare  b  )th  systems,  is  an  Arojinian  or  a  Calvinist 
not  because  he  sees  no  difficulties  in  the  scheme  which 
he  chooses;  but  because,  he  imagines  fewer  in  that  than 
in  the  other.  Such,  ot  both  systems,  as  have  eyes  to 
see  and  hearts  to  feel  these  difficMilties  just  urged,  are 
respectfully  invited  to  the  consideration  of  our 

2.  Proposition;  ''that  God  has  adopted  one  of  the  best 
possible  moral  systems.^^^'     We  may  safely  admit,  that 
an  infitiite  number  of  plans,   equally  2;ood  with  the  one 
which  Jehovah  has  actually  chosen,  is  possible;  but   to 
say,  that  from  the  mighty  range  of  possibilities,  a  better 
might  have  l)een  selected,  is  to  reflect  at  once  on  all  his 
natural  and    moral  perfections.     He  had    a   knowledge 
of  all  p(>ssibilities;  and  infinite  wisdom,  so  as,  out  of  all 
Hiese  possibilities,  to  make  the  very  best  selection,  and 
to  construct  them  into  the  very  best  possible   plan;  infi- 
nite goodness  to  influence  him  to  its  adoption;  and  infi- 
nite power  to  secure  its  execniion.     And  though,  in  this 
plan  of  moral  being,  and   mural  government,  some  evil 
be  fimnd;  yet  this  does   not  prove,   that  this  is  not  the 
best  possible   created   system.      With  God,  we  are   in- 
deed inlormed,  all  things  are  possible;  but  these,    "all 
things,"  must  be  understood  of  things  not  inconsistent 
with  the  combined  infinity  of  mH  his  peifections;  because 
in  the  same  book,  we  are  taught,  that  God  cannot  deny 
himself.     And  if  so,  it  maybe  inconsistent  with  his  per- 
fections, to  create  another  being  as  absolutely  perfect  as 
himself:  and  judging  from  the  Iripse  of  men,  and  of  the 
angels  who  kept  not  their  first  estate,  it  appears  altoge- 

*Spe  noi-e  C. 


17 

ther  probable,  that  any  moral  being  not  absolutely  perfect 
if  in  particular  circumstances  left  lo  himself,  is  liable  to 
fall  into  moral  evil.  The  morning  stars  that  encircled 
the  Maker's  throne,  and  he  who  led  their  hosts,  forfeit- 
ed their  first  abo\le,  and  were  cast  down  fmm  the  hea- 
vens and  consigned  to  the  blackness  of  darkness  forever. 
And  if  no  one  moral  creature  is  in  himself  exempt  from 
such  a  liability,  surely,  it  is  not  to  be  expected,  that  a 
system,  which  may  embrace  the  inhabitants  of  millions 
of  distant  worlds,  should  be  any  more  exempt  from  the 
same  liability.  So  that,  without  making  a  system  of 
moral  agents,  as  absolutely  perfect  as  himself—without 
communicating  to  every  agent  in  the  system,  the  immen- 
sity of  his  power,  wisdom,  goodness  and  imnnitability 
— which  would  be  nothing  less  than  to  create  another 
God — an  absurdity  even  in  idea — it  may  have  been  im- 
possible for  the  all  wise  and  omnipotent  Jehovah,  to 
construct  a  system  in  which  there  would  be  less  evil, 
than  in  the  one  which  he  has  chosen.  As  soon  as  he 
had  given  creation  the  last  touch  of  his  plastic  hand,  he 
pronounced  his  benediction  ou  the  new-born  existence, 
and  proclaimed  all  "very  good.'^  In  the  original,  the 
phrase  "very  good,"  is  the  intensity  of  the  superlative, 
"the  best.''  And  if  "the  best,"  it  must  not  only  have 
been  the  most  perfect,  as  it  then  was,  before  sin  had 
made  its  intrusions  into  the  fair  garden  of  God;  but  also, 
^Hhe  besf^  guarded  against  its  entrance  and  its  desola- 
tions. 

And  if  this  moral  system,  all  things  wisely  consider- 
ed, be  the  best,  God's  choice  was  not  between  a  moral 
system  in  which  there  would  be  no  evil,  and  one  like 
the  present,  in  which  there  is  some  evil;  but  between 
one  like  the  present  in  which  there  is  ^^on)e  evil,  and  o- 
thers  in  which  there  would  be  more  evil.  To  create  a 
system  in  which  there  would  be  no  liability  to  evil,  may 
be  just  as  impossible,  as  to  create  a  free  and  immutable 
creature— or,  as  that  there  should  be  a  creature  God, 
and  a  Creator  God.  And  hence,  God's  choosing  a  uni- 
yerse  in  which  there  is  some  moral  evil,  is  not  because 


18 

he  prefers  evil  to  ,e;o()d;  but  because  he  prefers  a  lea« 
evil  to  a  greater;  and  because  he  preferred  the  present 
system  with  all  its  evils,  to  the  non-existence  of  any 
system;  just  as  a  man  might  prefer  a  house,  not  so  su- 
perbly finished  as  Nebuchadnrazar's  palace,  to  the  en- 
tire want  of  a  place  of  residence. 

'I'he  very  idea  of  natural  liberty  conveys  the  possibi- 
lity of  acting  in  more  ways  than  one;  and  such  the 
fact  in  the  case  of  men  and  angels  demonstrates — they 
were  free  to  obey,  and  for  a  time  they  did  obey — they 
were  free  to  fall,  and  they  eventually  did  fall.  The 
idea  of  mutability,  is  a  liability  to  change:  men  and  an- 
gels did  change,  and  were  therefore  created  mutable;  and 
thus  they  are  proved  by  the  mournful  history  of  sin  to 
have  been  Iwih  free  and  mutable.  Now,  as  natural  li- 
berty and  mutability,  imply,  t!iat  the  being  or  beings  oa 
whom  they  are  delegated,  whilst  in  an  unconfirmed  state, 
may  change  from  better  to  worse,  as  well  as  from  good 
to  better,  it  is  a  contradiction  in  idea  to  sup|)ose  a  free, 
mutable,  unconfirmed  beina;  or  system  of  beings,  so  per- 
fect, th^t  it  maij  not  change  f(n^  the  worse.  And  if  so, 
the  total  exclusion  of  all  evil,  fi  rever,  from  the  moral 
universe,  on  any  plan,  consistent  with  the  combined 
perfections  of  Deity,  may  be  just  as  unavoidable  on  the 
part  of  the  Creator,  as  some  degree  of  im[)erfection  ia 
every  created  being.  If  therefore,  God  suffers  evil  into 
his  plan,  because,  with  the  existence  of  the  best  one  pos- 
sible, it  cannot  be  avoided,  its  existence  as  a  part  of  his 
plan,  is  no  more  a  proof  that  he  delights  in  sin,  or  that 
sin  is  right  or  useiul,  than  the  existence  of  natural  im- 
perfection in  the  creature,  is  a  proof,  that  he  delights  ia 
natural  imperfection,  or  that  it  is  good  and  useful.  If 
every  species  of  vines  is  more  or  less  liable  to  produce 
sapless  limbs,  and  a  Inisbandmau  should  choose  the 
kind,  liable  to  |)rodnce  the  fewest  possible,  his  choice 
would  be  so  ftr  from  proving  his  delight  in  fruitless 
branches,  that  it  W(»ul(l  demonstrate  the  contrary — that 
th^y  were  the  objects  of  his  aversion;  yet  that  he  would 
suffer  their  existence,  rather  than  cultivate  no  vine.     So 


19 

God's  choosing  the  system  which  has  the  least  possible 
moral  evil,  proves,  that  such  evil  is  not  his  delight,  hut 
his  aversion;  yet,  that  he  will  suffer  its  existence  rather 
than  there  should  he  no  system.  Again,  I  have  chosen 
a  watch,  though  I  foresaw,  that  it  would  need  repairing 
more  than  once  a  year,  and  that  sonittimes  1  would  he 
compelled  to  throw  away  some  pf  its  wheels,  wrought 
with  the  most  exquisite  workmanship,  and  composed  of 
the  most  precious  materials.  Now,  1  chose  this  watch, 
not  because  I  delight  in  its  imperfections,  the  costs  and 
trouble  of  its  repairs,  and  the  loss  of  some  of  its  wheels 
—on  the  contrary,  I  dislike  the  expence  and  trouble  of 
repairs  and  am  grieved  at  the  loss  of  any  of  its  parts; 
hut  I  chose  it  because  I  could  obtain  no  better;  and  ra- 
ther than  loose  the  use  of  the  watch  entirely,  I  submit 
to  the  expence  and  trouble  of  repairs,  and  to  the  grief 
of  throwing  away  the  faulty  parts;  although  1  prize 
their  materials  and  their  workmanship.  Even  so,  God 
has  chosen  the  present  system,  not  because  he  delighted 
in  the  evils  which  he  foresaw  as  its  ceitain  concomi- 
tants:— on  the  contrary  he  hates  sin,  and  is  grieved 
when  he  casts  out  any  of  his  rebellious  creatures  to  de- 
struction;— yet  rather  than  there  should  be  no  moral 
universe,  he  suffers  the  existence  of  sin;  and  rather 
than  permit  sin  to  destroy  the  whole  system,  he  submits 
to  the  grief  of  chastising  transgressors,  although  he 
loves  the  impress  they  bear  of  his  own  workmanship, 
and  the  grandeur  of  those  immortal  powers  that  resem- 
ble the  image  of  himself. 

I'hus,  though  the  Great  God  excludes  blind  chance, 
as  well  as  5/mrf  fate,  from  his  universe,  and  moves  on 
his  vast  affairs  according  to  a  most  wise  plan;  and  whilst 
he  suffers  sin  and  misery  to  fall  within  the  range  of 
that  plan;  yet  we  may  see  how  it  is  still  true,  and  lite- 
rally true,  that  he  loves  even  Lis  erring  creatures:  has 
no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked:  is  not  willing, 
that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  re- 
pentance: will  have  all  men  to  be  saved:  and  how  the 
Saviour  hi  the  most  unqualified  sense,  would  have  gathc 


so 

cred  the  children  of  Jerusalem  together  as  a  hen  gath- 
ereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings. 

Perhaps  some  will  grant,  that  this  view  of  the  sub- 
ject gives  a  plausible  and  perhaps  a  true  explanation 
of  these  texts;  but  they  will  say  "If  this  be  true,  you  mu^t 
yield  your  doctrine,  that  God  chooses  men,  not  because 
of  their  faith,  or  good  works,  or  any  other  thing  in  the 
creature,  as  conditions  or  causes  moving  him  thereunto; 
and  that  men  are  made  willing  in  the  day  of  God's  pow- 
er:*—if  this  all  be  true,  it  cannot  be,  that  Christ  was 
"willing  to  gather  the  children  of  Jerusalem,  or  he  would 
have  exerted  his  power  to  make  them  willing.'^  i3ut 
if  the  willingness  produced  in  the  day  of  God  s  power, 
mean  the  willingness  of  a  new  creature;  and  the  wil- 
lingness alluded  to,  in  Christ's  complaint  of  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Jerusalem,  the  willingness  of  sinners  not  rege- 
nerated, but  so  convicted  by  the  common  operations  of 
the  Spirit,  as  to  feel  tlie  absolute  necessity  of  a  Saviour 
and  as  to  ensure  regeneration;  and  if,  while  we  hold 
the  faith  and  good  works  here  specified,  not  to  be  the 
causes,  but  the  effect  of  regeneration,  or  of  what  is  the 
same  thing,  of  God/ s  choice',  and,  that  neither  these,  nor 
any  other  qualities  in  the  creature,  influence  his  cboo- 
sirigs,  so  as  to  destroy  the  certainty,  or  give  condition- 
alily  to  his  present  plan:  we  also  hold,  that  there  is  an 
eternal  coincidence  between  the  manner  in  which  the 
sinner,  before  regeneration,  treats  the  common  opera- 
tions of  that  Spirit,  who  convinces  the  world  of  sin,  of 
righteousness,  and  of  judgment,  and  God's  purpose  to 
regenerate  the  soul;  and,  that,  though  it  was  uncondi- 
tionally Christ's  purpose  not  to  regenerate  these  Jews — 
the  things  that  belonged  to  their  peace,  being  forever  hid 
from  their  eyes;t  yet  that  had  they  been  vvilling  in  the 
sense  above  described,  this  willingness,  as  the  free  act 
of  the  creature,  God  woul<l  have  foreknown  coeternally 
with  the  determination  of  his  plan;  and  it  would  have 
been  made  a  part  of  that  plan;  and,  as  there  is  an  eter- 
nal agreement  between  his  foreknowledge  of  the  free  acts 

•Ps.  ex.  3,    tLuke  XIX.  40,, 


at 

of  creatures  and  bis  determinations,  in  agreement  with 
their  willingness,  it  would  have  been  his  unconditional 
plan  to  regenerate  them;  and  thus  to  make  tliem  a  m  il- 
ling  people  in  the  day  of  l»is  power— f/^^w  where  is  the 
discrepance  between  God's  absolute  and  unconditional 
purpose,  and  his  unqualified  willingness  to  save  these 
unrelenting  sinners?  And  if  this  be  a  correct  exhi[)itiou 
of  the  subject;  then,  though  from  eternity  the  unwilling- 
ness of  these  Jews  was  unconditionally  decreed;  yet  if 
instead  of  this,  their  willingness  from  all  eternity  had 
been  certain  and  it  was  their  choice  and  thertfore,  their 
sin  that  it  was  not  so,  their  willingness  would,  from  eter- 
nity, have  beers  just  as  unronditionally  decreed;  for  the  re- 
lation between  the  evil  choosings  of  God's  creatures  and 
his  decree  is  not  that  of  cause  and  eflect  or  antecedent 
and  consequent;  but  that  of  coincidence.  And  hence 
we  may  say,  that  if  any  wicked  choice  of  the  creature 
were  different,  without  an^  conditionality,  God's  decree 
in  relation  to  that  choice  would  be  different. 

As  all  these  immediately  preceding  remarks  tend  to 
illustrate  and  demonstrate  God's  love  to  all  men,  and 
his  desire  that  all  should  be  saved;  nothing  more  need 
be  said,  to  vindicate  his  sincerity  in  the  universal  of- 
fer of  the  Gospel.  But  it  is  asked,  how  can  he  wisely 
offer  it  to  all,  if  he  know  that  some  will  not  accept? 

The  Gospel  offer  contains  a  command.  And  if  so, 
why  may  he  not  as  wisely  command  men  to  obey  the 
Gospel,  although  he  knows,  that  his  commands  will  be 
ineffectual;  as  command  Adam  not  to  eat  the  fruit  of  the 
forbidden  tree,  and,  Pharoah  to  let  his  people  go,  when 
he  knew,  they  would  render  no  obedience  to  his 
mandates?  Also  as  the  moral  governor  of  the  Universe; 
it  is  wise  to  offer  the  Gospel  to  men  who,  he  knows, 
will  not  receive  it  with  an  obedient  faith;  because,  in 
thus  displaying  his  love,  his  mercy,  and  his  goo<'ness 
he  addresses  the  strongest  motives  to  produce  obedience, 
and  motives,  which  frequently,  when  not  obeyed  to  a 
saving  extent,  nevertheless  lay  restraints  on  the  wick- 
ed, and  nroduce  a  salutary  effect  upon  human  society. 


And  it  is  also  wise,  that  in  the  day  of  judgment,  in  the 
sight  of  the  universe,  every  mouUi  may  be  stopt  and  all 
the  world  become  guilty  before  God.  We  hasten  to  aa 
a|)j)liratioii: — 

Jf  tlie  positions,  vindicated  under  the  second  head  of 
this  discourse,  be  true  the  Calviiiist  is  enabled  to  retain 
all  his  truths,  and  expliin  all  his  p'Tuliar  difficulties. 
J  f  God's  foreknowledge  of  the  sinful  cho'»sings  of  his 
creaturos,  does  not  arise  otit  of  his  decrees?  and  if  the 
relation  between  his  foreknowledge  of  these  choosings, 
and  his  determinations  in  relation  to  them,  be  only  that 
of  agreement  or  coincidence;  we  have  seen,  that  in 
perfect  consistency  with  the  belief  of  God's  eternal  and 
unchangeable  determinations,  it  maybe  true,  that  he  has 
no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked — that  Christ, 
in  the  most  litprcd  sense  was  willing  to  have  gathered 
the  unbelieving  children  of  .lerusalem  together  as  a  hen 
gathereth  her  chi':kens  under  her  wings,  if  they  would 
have  been  gathered— and  that  so  it  is  true  in  every  other 
case,  that  if  any  more  would  come  to  Christ,  than  will 
come,  his  eternal  decree,  always  coeval  and  coincident 
with  his  eternal  foieknowledge,  would  have  been  to 
save  tliem;  and  that  if  the  sinner  is  not  elected  it  is  entirely 
his  own  fault — like  the  Jews  he  would  not.  Thus  the 
Calvinist,  whilst  he  holds  the  wisdom  and  supremacy 
of  his  God,  directing  all  things,  from  the  movements  of  an 
iidinity  of  worlds,  to  the  number  of  every  hair,  and  the 
fall  of  every  sparrow;  with  all  the  latitude  of  an  Armi- 
iii^n;  can  assure  sinners,  and  prove  to  them  from  the 
arguments  of  reason,  and  the  authority  of  the  iJible, 
that  if  any  more  would  come  to  the  Haviour,  his  uncon- 
ditional decree  would  have  been,  their  salvjition;  and, 
that  by  their  sins  they  have  literally  compelled  God, 
eitiier  to  cast  down  his  wisdom  from  his  throne,  and 
leave  the  w^orld  lawless,  or  to  pass  upon  them  the  de- 
ore**  of  re[)roh;ition. 

Also  if  ail  the  parts  of  God's  universal  plan  were  per- 
formed l»y  one  simple  intuitive  glance  of  the  ininite 
mind,  without  beginning  or  succession;  the  cause  of  dis^ 


S3 

pute,  between  the  Sublapsarian  and  the  Biipralapsari- 
an  disappears  and  they  are  left  reconciled. 

Again,  these  views  may  serve  to  lighten  the  shades, 
that  misapprehension  frequently  hangs  around  the  third 
chapter  of  our  Confession  of  Faith. 

''God  from  all  eternity  did  by  tlip  most  wise  and  ho- 
ly counsel  of  his  own  will,  freely  and  unchangeably  m*- 
dain  whatsoever  comes  to  pass;  yet  so  as  thereby  mither 
is  God  the  author  of  sin;  nor  is  violence  offered  to  the 
will  of  the  creatures;  nor  is  the  liberty  or  contingency 
of  second  causes  taken  away  but  rather  established.^^ 

In  this  discourse,  it  has  been  shown,  that  Gnd  made 
the  volitions  of  his  creatures,  a  part  of  the  plan  wliich 
he  ordained;  and  that  these  volitions  coincide  with  the 
other  parts  of  his  plan,  and  the  other  parts  of  his  plan 
with  these  volitions:  and  also  that  as  God  does  all,  that 
can  be  done  consistently  with  that  natural  lil)erty,  which 
is  essential  to  a  moral  creature,  to  prevent  sin,  he  cannot 
be  its  author. 

"II.  Although  God  knows  whatsoever  may  or  can 
come  to  pa'is,  upon  all  supposed  conditions;  yet  hath  he 
not  decreed  any  thing  because  he  foresaw  it  as  future^ 
ar  as  that  which  woidd  come  to  pass,  upon  such  condi- 
tions.^' 

The  doctrine  that  God  foreknows  and  decrees  all  e- 
vents,  coevally  and  without  beginning  or  succession,  re- 
moves from  his  plan  every  idea  of  conditionality. 

"111.  By  the  decree  of  God,  for  the  manifestation  of 
his  glory,  some  men  and  angels  are  predestinated  unto 
everlasting  life,  and  others  foreordained  to  everlasting 
death.'' 

These  men  and  angels  foreordained  to  everlasting  death, 
were  doomed  to  their  endless  condemnation  for  their 
sins — for  the  abuse  of  that  natural  liberty  essential  to 
moral  beings — an  abuse,  which  a"  holy  God  decreed 
to  suffer,  as  a  part  of  his  plan;  not  because  he  had  plea- 
sure in  sin  or  in  the  death  of  the  wicked;  but  because, 
consistently  with  the  nature  of  a  moral  system,  wluch 


24? 

always  implies,  in  beings  not  confirmed  by  moral  means, 
a  naUiral  liberty  of  doiiis;  wrong  as  well  as  right — as  a 
moral  Governor  be  could  not  prevent  it.  Men  and  an- 
2;els  would  shi^  in  spite  of  every  moral  means  of  preven- 
tion— as  a  moral  Governor  he  could  use  no  other  bot 
moral  means,  and  hence  not  by  a  mere  arbitrary,  Init  by 
a  most  wise,  just,  and  merciful  sovereignty,  in  pursuance 
of  the  best  possible  plan,  and  in  the  righteous  execution 
of  the  law,  ^'-The  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die,"  he  fore- 
ordained these  men  and  angels  to  everlasting  death — 
relactantly, iusi  as  a  man  would  cast  away  some  of  the 
wheels  of  a  v/atch,  valuable  and  prized  for  their  mate- 
rials and  workmanship,  because  as  parts  of  the  watch 
they  become  disorderly  and  injurious. 

'*1V.  These  angels  and  men^  thus  predestinated  and 
foreordained,  are  particularly  and  unchangeably  design- 
ed; and  their  number  is  so  certain  and  definite,  that  it 
can  not  be  either  increased  or  diminished.''' 

God  from  eternity  foresaw  the  "certain  number,'^ 
which  by  any  moral  means,  would  not  be  prevented 
from  destruction;  and  coevally  and  coincidentally  with 
with  this  foreknowledge  of  their  sins,  he  decreed  their 
destruction.  And  if  their  number  be  so  certain,  that  it 
can  not  be  diminished;  it  is  because,  by  moral  means  no 
more  can  be  induced  to  change  their  course.  If  a  grea- 
ter number  could  be  influenced  to  choose  to  act  different- 
ly, their  choice  would  have  been  eternally,  and  uncon- 
ditionally foreknown;  and,  in  agreement  with  this,  it, 
together  with  all  its  consequences,  would  have  been  co- 
eternally  and  uncondititmally  decreed.  Ho,  that,  if 
their  number  is  certain,  their  sins  make  it  such.  80 
much  for  the  certainty  of  the  number  of  the  reprobate; 
of  the  others  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  speak. 

"V.  Those  of  mankind  that  are  predestinated  unto 
life,  God,  before  the  foundation  of  the  world  wan  ^aid^ 
according  to  his  eternal  and  immutable  jpurposp^  and  the 
secret  c<nmsel  and  good  pleasure  of  his  will^  hath  chosen 
in  Christ  unto  everlasting  glory,  out  of  his  mere  free 
grace  and  love^  without  any  foresight  of  faith  or  good 
works ^  or  perseverence  in  either  of  them^  or  any  other 


25 


thivg  in  the  creature;  as  conditions,  or  causes  moving 
him   thereunto^  and  all  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious 


grace. ''^ 


Foresight  of  faith  or  good  works,  to  influence  God's 
choice,  there  could  be  none;  for  until  his  eternally  de- 
termined election  is  accomplished  in  the  work  of  the  Spi- 
rit, who  changes  the  heart;  there  is  no  justifying  faith  or 
works  scripturally  good.  In  this  change  from  death 
unto  life,  men  unholy  before,  are  chosen  that  they 
'^should  be  holy."^  Nor  was  he  moved  to  this  by  any 
other  thing  foreseen  in  the  creature,  as  a  condition  or  a 
cause.  As  the  mighty  Sovereign  of  the  universe,  he 
presf  ribes  his  own  laws  for  the  bestowmeot  of  his  owa 
mercies.  And  whilst  loving  the  workmanship  of  his 
own  hands,  he  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved;  still  he 
will  save  none,  but  upon  his  own  terms;  and  his  terms  are, 
to  give  the  special  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  regene- 
rate all  such  as  so  regard  his  common  operations,  as  to  be 
thoroughly  convinced  of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of 
judgment — as  to  feel,  that  they  must  receive  aid  from  on 
high,  or  perish— as  to  perseveringly  determine,  that  they 
will  seek  the  Lord  until  they  find  him.  For  *Ho  this  maa 
will  I  look,"  says  Gud,  "even  to  him  that  is  poor,  and 
of  a  contrite  spirit,  and  trembleth  at  my  word/'f  1^  is 
because  he  will  have  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mer- 
cy; and  not  from  any  goodness  in  their  unholy  endea- 
vours, that  he  saves  them  in  this  way. 

'*VI.  .Gis  God  hath  appointed  the  elect  unto  glory,  so 
hath  he.  by  the  eternal  and  most  fref  piirposp  ofhlsu-illy 
foreordained  all  the  means  thereunto.  Wherrfore, 
they  who  are  elected,  being  fallen  in  Mam,  are  reiee- 
medhy  Christ,  are  effectually  called''  Iregenerated^ 
"unto  faith  in  Christ  by  his  Spirit  worhng  in  due  sea- 
son; are  justified,  adopted^  sanctified  and  kf^pt  by  his 
jpower  through  faith  unto  Salvation,^'  this  part  needs 
no  comment.  All  christians  admit,  that  ti.ey  who  arc 
saved,  are  saved  through  Christ  by  the  sauclifying  in- 
fluence of  his  Spirit." 

•  •Eph.  I.  4.    flss,  LXVI.  2. 

4} 


^6 

^'^'^Qithev  are  any  other  redeemed  by  Christy  effectu- 
ally called,  justified^  adojited^  sanctified^  and  saved,  but 
the  elect  only. 

VII.  The  r^st  of  mankind,  God  was  j^^^ctsed,  accor- 
ding to  the  unsearchable  counsel  of  his  own  will,  where- 
by he  extendeth  or  withholdeth  niercy  as  he  pleaseth,  for 
the  glory  of  his  Sovereign  j^f^u^pr  over  his  creatures,  to 
pass  by  and  ordain  them  to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  their 
sins,  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious  justice.^' 

God  from  eternity  foresaw,  that  a  certain  number  of 
the  human  fa-uily,  would  not  be  influenced  by  any  mor- 
al means  to  seek  his  grace,  so  as  to  become  new  crea- 
turpft  io  Christ  Jesus.  Coeternally  with  this  foreknow- 
ledi^p;  in  adopting  a  plan,  in  whicli,  as  the  only  wise 
God.  he  w(»uhl  not  he  deceived,  for  their  impenitence, 
he  left  them  out  of  the  nund^er,  which  he  determined  to 
save  by  the  redemj)tion  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  Just 
as  it  sometimes  is  tlie  reluctant  pleasure  of  a  kind  and 
nierrifnl  father,  out  of  a  re^^ard  for  the  reputation  and 
the  interest  of  his  family;  and  for  the  wise  and  just  exer- 
cise of  that  authority  with  which,  as  a  parent,  he  is  in- 
vested, and  by  which  he  has  a  natural  ri^^ht,  to  extend 
or  withhold  his  property  as  he  pleases,  in  his  will,  to 
pass  by,  and  thus  to  ordain  to  dishonor  and  want,  a 
disobedient  and  proflii^atc  son;  so,  in  eternal  agreement 
with  their  purpose,  foreseen  to  resist  his  Spirit,  and  ne- 
glect his  grace,  it  was  his  pleasure,  "according  to  the 
unsearchable  counsel  of  his  own  will,  whereby  he  ex- 
tendeth or  withholdeth  mercy  as  he  pleaseth,  for  the 
glory  of  his  8overei2:n  power  over  his  creatures, '^  to  de- 
termine, that  Christ's  blood,  should  never  redeem  them 
from  the  condemnation  due  their  iniquities;  and  thus 
^Ho  ordain  them  to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  their  sins,  to 
the  praise  of  his  glmious  justice,"  and  in  this  sense, 
Christ  is  said  to  lay  down  his  life  for  his  sheep  only:^- 
and  though,  this  now  is  his  jdan,  not  to  be  chan2;cd  by  any 
conditionality;  yet,  as  there  is  an  eternal  coincidence  be- 
tween the  free  actions  of  his  creatures  foreseen,  and  his 

•John  X, 15. 


S7 

determinations  coeternal  with  this  foreknowledge;  if  their 
choice  were  different,  (and  that  it  is  not,  is  their  crime) 
it  would  have  been  foreseen  as  different;  the  eternal  de- 
terminations of  God  would  have  coincided  with  it  as 
such;  and  God's  unconditional  plan  then  would  have 
been,  that  these  men  should  be  redeemed  by  Christ.  It  is 
their  own  sins,  foreknown  indeed,  but  uninfluenced  by 
that  foreknowledge;  and  decreed  indeed,  but  so  as  to  be 
uncaused  by  any  decree — it  is  their  own  sins,  that  have 
separated  them  from  the  saving  efficacy  of  the  Saviour's 
blood.  But  as  the  Lamb  of  God  ''taketh  away  the  sins 
of  the  world,''^  his  sufferings  were  sufficient  to  satisfy 
the  demands  of  justice  for  all;  and  as  God  loved  the 
world,  and  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved;  his  desire  is 
that  all  should  be  redeemed  by  his  death;  and  thus  it  is 
literally  true,  that  Christ,  in  every  sense  consisreot  w  ith 
a  wisdom,  which  can  never  be  deceived,  and  a  plaa 
which  can  never  be  broken,  ^'by  the  grace  of  God,  tas- 
ted death  for  every  nianf^  and  if  none  resisted  the  holy 
Spirit,  all  would  have  been  redeemed  by  Christ,  effectu- 
ally called,  justified,  adopted,  sanctified,  and  saved. 
And,  that  their  neglect  of  God's  gifts,  and  their  resis- 
tance of  the  common  operations  of  his  Spirit,  are  the  oc- 
casion of  their  reprobation,  is  the  true  sense  of  our  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  we  may  learn  from  the  answer  in  our 
larger  catechism,  which  declares;  *'All  the  elect,  and 
they  only,  are  effectually  called;"  [regenerated;]  *»al- 
though  others  may  be,  and  often  are,  outwardly  called 
by  the  ministry  of  the  word,  and  have  s(>rae  common 
operations  of  the  Spirit;  who  for  their  wilful  neglect  and 
contempt  of  the  grace  offered  to  them,  being  jtistly  left 
in  their  unbelief,  do  never  truly  come  to  Jes^us  Christ."| 
Again,  if  these  positions  are  true,  they  enable  the 
Arminian,  whilst  he  preaches  his  grand  and  Scrij)tMral 
doctrine,  that  grace  is  free  to  all,  also  to  escape  from 
the  necessities  ofa  system,  which  drives  him  to  acontra- 
dictim  of  such  texts  as  teach,  that  God  pred<^stinates 
men  to  be  "covformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son^^'X  and  that 

*John  I.  29,    fLarge  Catechism,  ques.  68.    |Rom.  VIII,  29,      ~ 


S8 

be  chooses  them  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
that  they  •*shouhl  be  holy  and  without  blame  before  him 
in  love."*  If  these  principles  be  true,  whilst  he  main- 
tains his  favourite  theme;  ^'JVo  man  is  eternallif  lost  be- 
cause he  has  been  borne  to  hell  by  fin  eternal  decree,^^ 
he  may  consistently  proclaim  an  all  wise,  supreme,  and 
Sovereign  God;  who  after  an  eternal,  unchangeable, 
and  stupendous  plan,  well  ordered  in  all  things  and 
sure,  doth  his  will  iu  the  armies  of  heaven  and  among 
the  inhabitants  of  the  earth;  and  wiio  worketh  all  things 
after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.  If  these  things  be 
true,  we  have  a  system  of  Christianity  that  rests  not 
on  a  single  text  as  on  a  pivot;  but  one,  which  touches 
the  Bible  as  a  foundation  at  every  side,  end,  and  corner. 
And,  that  they  are  true,  is  just  as  reasouable,  as  that 
God  should  be  at  once  wise  and  merciful.  What  are 
the  Calvinian  texts,  but  expressions  of  his  immutable 
wisdom?— and  what  the  Arminian,  but  the  declarations 
of  his  loving  kindness  and  tender  mercy? — If  these  prin- 
ciples be  carried  out  into  their  consequences,  as  has  been 
proved,  they  explain  the  cardinal  difficulties  of  Biblical 
theology;  and  whilst  they  lay  the  axe  at  the  root  oF  phi- 
losophical Calvinism  and  [)hilosophical  Arminianism, 
they  secure  us  that  Bible  Calvinism,  which  gives  a  God 
^^declaring  the  end  from  the  beginning,"!  ^"^^  whose  sys- 
em  reaches  to  the  movement  of  every  thought,  and  the 
wandering  of  every  atom,  in  the  fullest  hurmony  with  a 
Bible  Arminianism,  which  extends  his  benevolence 
as  wide  as  the  circumference  of  creation;  they  will 
dissipate  many  of  the  my>iteries  that  hang  around  the  tem- 
ple of  Christiariity,  disgrace  its  form,  and  darken  its  glo- 
ry; and  present  us  a  reasonable  system,  and  whatisbesf. 
of  all,  one,which  accords  with  the'letter  of  the  Bihle,  and 
which  reconciles,  without  wresting  the  Scriptures;  and 
last  of  all,  if  the  words  of  truth  and  soberness,  they  will 
harmonize  and  tranqnilize  the  church  of  God;  heal  the 
div.sions,  that  rend  the  body  of  the  Saviour;  bind  the 
people  of  God  together  iu  the  bonds  of  love^  and   pre- 

•Eph.  I,  4.    jlsa.  XLVI,  10. 


29 


pare  them  for  that  millenial  effort,  which  will  pour  the 
light  of  heaven  into  every  mind;  and  the  love  of  God 
into  every  heart;  and  that  will  fill  the  earth  with  the 
knowledge  of  the  Lord,  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea.— 
Amen. 


A 

The  mode  of  speaking  very   much    in  use  among  divines  on  this   sub- 
ject, is  that  there  is  in   the    operations  of  the  Suprenrie   mind,   no  order  o/" 
ti7ne;  but  the    order   of  reason.     With  regard  to  there  being   no  order  of 
time,  or  perhaps  more  accurately,  no  order  of  duration,  the  idea  weil  com- 
ports with  the  absolute  perfection  of  that  Infinite  Being,  •who  is  "the  same, 
yesterday,  to-day  and  forever  "     But  why   speak  of  tie  order  (J" reason,  and 
of  the  operations  of  the  divine  intellect,  just  as  if  Deity  wt  re  like  ourselves, 
under  the  necessity  of  reasoning;   and  just  as  if  in  the  contemplation  and 
adoption  of  his  moral  system,  there  were  consecutive  operatior.s?     Does  not 
this  idea  make  God  too  much  like  the  creature?  Is  it  not  the   perfection  of 
knowledge  to  know  all  things  and  of  wisdom  to  plan  all  things,  without  any 
succession  in  reason,  any  more  than  in  duration?  Is  it  not  more  consir.-^ent 
wirh  the  idea  of  infinite  perfection,  in  knowledge  and  wisdom,  to  suppose, 
that  God  knows  and  determines  not  without  reason  (that  is,  not  without  that 
which  is  analagousto  the  result  of  our  reasoning;)  but  without  the  beginning 
or  the  succession  of  reasoning;  just  as  it  is  to  suppose,  that  he  knows  and 
determines  without  any  beginning  or  succession  in  duration?  But  we  are  told, 
that  we  can  not  conceive,  how  there  can  be  knowledge,  and  determinations 
without  beginning  or  succession  in  reason.  Granted.  So  neither  can  we  con- 
ceive, how  there  can  be  knowledge,  and  determinations,  wi':hou*-  a  beginning 
or  succession  in  duration.    In  each  we  are  equally  overwhelmed  in  the  divine 
infinity.     Why  then  deny  the  one,  and  admit  the  other?    They  stand  or  fall 
together.     We  can  not  conceive,  how  there  can  be  succession  in  reason,  with- 
out a  corresponding  succession  in  duration.     Let  any  man  contemplate  God, 
as  viewing  all  possibilities,  selecting  and  combining  these  possibilities,  and  de- 
termining them  into  a  certain  system,  as  he  would  say  '-according  to  the  or- 
der of  reason,"  and  see  if  he  can  separate  from  them,  the  idea  of  an  antece- 
dent and  consequent  duiation,  apporcioiifd  to  each.     You  may  suppose,  the 
succession  of  reason  ten  thousand  times  more  rapid  than  the  lightening,  that 
glances  in  the  twinklirg  of  an    eye,  frona  one    end  of  htaven  to  the  o^her; 
but  still  you  do  not  separate  from  it  the  idea  of  aconesjjonding<^urcession  in 
duration.     The  analogv  between  the  creature  and  the  Creator   is  /^mmledge, 
not  the  acquiretnent  of  hyiom^Udge      God  knows  by  an  eternal  inc.iition;  man 
by  a  process  of  ratiocination.      To  speak  of  ^he  order  or  succession  of  rea» 
son  without  reasoning,  is  to  me  incoinprehensible.     Manemploy.s  his  reason, 
xng  powers  to  lead  him  to  knowledge  (I  mean  that  knowledge  which  is  not 
intuitive)  just  as  he  employs    his  locomotive  organs  to  arrive  at  a  desired 
place.     In  forming  an  idea  of  his  transit,  we  must  conceive  in  the  order  of 
locality  and  duration,  that  his  first  step  was/romthe  place  of  departure,  and 
his  last  to  a^t.  place  oif  his  arrival;  but  as  God  is  Omnipresent,  no  such  ideas 


30 

either  of  locality  or  duration,  ought  for  a  moment  to  be  entertained  of  him. 
He  performs  no  such  operation;  he  takes  no  such  order;  with  him  it  is  un. 
necessary;  he  already  is  present  in  every  place.  So  if,  as  is  admitted,  God 
knows  all  things  by  an  eternal  intuition— if  all  causes  and  effects  and  ante- 
cedents  and  consequents,  are  alike  the  subjects  of  his  immense  survey— he 
performs  no  reasoning  process:  he  takes  no  order  of  reason;  with  him  it  is 
superfluous;  by  his  infinite  intuition,  wirhout  reasoning,  he  occupies  every 
point  of  knowledge,  to  which  reason  could  conduct,  just  as  by  his  Omnipre- 
sence, without  locomotion,  he  occupies  every  point  of  space  to  which  loco- 
m<^tion  could  lead. 

In  this  order  of  reason,  supposed  to  exist  in  the  divine  mind,  originate 
the  Anninian  and  Cilviniau  differences.  The  high  Calvinist,  or  Supralap- 
sarian,  supposes  the  order  of  reason  in  the  divine  mind  to  be  this — God  de- 
termined  to  glorify  himself;  this  he  foresaw  could  be  done  by  the  glorifica- 
tion of  some  creatures  and  the  destrucuon  of  others;  he  therefore  determin- 
ed, that  some  creatures  should  be  destroyed;  and  others  glorified:  he  fore- 
saw, that  he  would  i>e  the  most  glorified  by  saving  from  destruction  some 
fallen  beings;  and  by  leaving  others  to  perish  in  their  sins;  he  therefore  de- 
termined to  save  some  and  let  others  perish;  but  there  could  none  perish  or 
be  saved  without  falling  in^o  sin;  he  therefore  decreed  to  suffer  them  to  fall 
into  sin:  and  as  none  could  fall  into  sin  or  abide  in  obedience  without  exis- 
tence,  he  determined  to  make  such  creatures  as  would  fall  into  sin  or  remain 
in  obedience  Thus  according  to  the  Supralapsarian,  that  which  is  last  in 
the  order  of  reason,  was  first  in  the  order  of  execution.  The  inoderate  Cal- 
vinist,  or  the  Sublapsarian  supposes  the  order  of  reason  to  be,  that  God  de- 
termined to  glorify  himself  by  creating  intelligent  beings;  he  then  foresaw^ 
that  some,  by  abuse  of  liberty,  would  fall  into  sin;  he  then  decreed  to  save 
some  men  and  leave  others,  together  with  the  angels  who  kept  not  their 
first  estate,  to  perish  in  their  sins,  and  so  on,  just  the  reverse  of  the  Supra- 
lapsarian. 

Arminian  writers,  so  far  as  I  have  con'-ulted  them,  exhibit  no  very  clear 
statements  on  this  su',)ject:  yet  as  Arminius  supposed,  that  God  determined 
tie  salvation  of  some  men.  on  a  foresight  of  their  faith,  and  determined  to 
damn  others  on  account  of  their  foreseen  unbelief,  his  philosophy  appears 
to  follow  that  of  the  Sublapsarian  in  this  supposed  order  of  reason;  but  todeny, 
that  the  sin  of  men  or  angels,  made  any  part  of  God's  plan.  Arminian s 
•appear  generally  to  suppose,  that  if  this  were  the  case,  God  would  be  the 
Author  of  sin  Their  order  of  reason  would  probably  be  this:  God  deter- 
niined  to  make  man;  then  he  foresaw,  but  did  not  decree,  even  permissive - 
Iv,  his  fall;  on  the  foresight  of  his  full  he  determined  to  send  Christ  to  save 
all;  but  foreseeing  all  wruldnot  believe  he  determined  lastly  to  save  all  who 
he  foresaw  would  believe;  but  to  damn  all  that  he  foresaw  would  not.— - 
Some  Arminians  perceiving,  that  to  create  man  foreseeing  that  he  would 
certainly  fall,  is  tantamount  to  permissively  decreeing  his  fall,  have  denied 
God's  f:^reknowledge  of  his  creatun's  sins!  r See  note  B.)  Thus  all  these 
different  systems  of  phd>)Sophy  which  give  the  sectarian  tinge  to  liiblical  ex- 
posi'ion,  find  their  fortifications  in  this  supposed  onler  (if  reason.  Now  if  it 
be  found  that  no  such  order  exists  in  the  divine  niina,  the  strong  hold  of 
contention  is  demolished. 

B 

If  tV.ls  conseqtience  be  logical — and  that  it  h  not,  is  yet  to  be 
proved  -  Anniniaiiism  after  wresting  :ind  torturing,  that  class  of  texts, 
"whi^^h  teach  tiiat  (lod  "vvorketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his 
own  will,"  falls  short  of  its   avowed    object — extending  the  love  of 


Si 

God  to  all  the  human  race.  It  only  appears  to  do  this,  for  to  create 
man  knowing,  that  he  would  certainly  sin  and  be  lost,  is  just  about 
the  same  as  to  decree  his  sin  and  destruction. 

In  this  age  of  invention,  a  salvo  from  these  pressing  consequences, 
which  as  strongly,  as  the  most  severe  C  alvinism  appear  to  exhibit  God 
as  the  author  of  sin,  is  imagined  to  be  found  in  supposing,  that  the 
Supreme  Being  chooses  not  to  foreknow  all  things,  and  in  many  ca- 
ses prefers  ignorance  to  kn  >wledge.  1  deny,  that  creating  a  free  and 
intelligent  being,  knowing  that  he  will  certainly  sin,  constitutes  the 
Creator  the  author  of  the  creature's  sin,  any  more,  than  knowing 
from  the  analogy  of  nature,  that  every  child,  born  into  the  world,  if 
preserved  to  years  of  accountability,  will  sin,  constitutes  the  parent 
the  author  of  the  sins  committed  by  his  child.  But  admitting  it  did; 
this  imaginary  doctrine  affords  no  relief. — Suppose  some  supernatural 
agent  from  the  invisible  world,  should  appear,  and  with  the  breath 
of  inspiration,  endow  me  with  power  to  create'any  kind  of  moral  be- 
ing I  might  choose;  and  also  impart  to  me  the  attribute  of  prescience; 
so  that,  if  1  chose,  I  migh*,  before  creating  him,  foreknow  all  the  e- 
vents  that  would  certainly  attend  his  whole  existence;  and  1  would 
determine  to  create  the  being;  but  would  resolve  not  to  know  his  char- 
acter, his  conduct  or  his  end;  and  imagine  thatas  soon  as  he  obtained 
existence,  he  should  snatch  a  sword,  enter  a  church,  murder  the  whole 
congregation,  and  be  apprehended,  condemned,  and  gibbetted;  and 
that  some  wretched  widow,  whom  his  bloody  hand  had  bereaved, 
should  come  to  me  and  remonstrate — Saying,  "Sir,  why  did  you 
create  such  a  cruel,  murderous,  and  unfortunate  being?" — and  I 
should  answer — *'But  1  did  not  know  what  the  events  of  his  existence 
would  be,"  and  she  would  ask,  Sir,  might  you  not  have  known  if 
you  would?" — and  if  so;  for  not  knowing,  when  you  might,  what 
w^ould  be  the  consequence  of  his  creation;  are  you  not  chargeable  with 
folly;  and  what  is  woise — a  recklessness  of  the  lives  of  your  fellow  men 
and  the  welfare  of  your  own  workmanship?'*  Now,  how  could  1 
deny  the  charge?  Would  1  be  less  reprehensible,  because  1  did  not 
know,  when  1  might  have  known,  and  wnen  my  ignorance  was  a 
matter  of  design?  So  that,  if  creating  this  bloody  agent,  knowing 
what  he  would  do,  constitutes  me  the  author  of  his  sins,  then  design- 
cdl}--  not  knowing,  when  I  might  have  known,  makes  me  equally  the 
author  of  his  crimes.  And  in  the  same  manner,  if  creating  moral  be- 
ings— men  and  Angels — knowing  that  they  would  certainly  ein, 
involves  the  Great  God  in  the  authorship  of  their  iniquity;  the  black- 
ness of  the  picture  is  rather  deepened  than  otherwise,  by  supposing 
him  when  creating  them,  wilfully  ignorant  of  the  sins  of  which  they 
afterwards  would  be  guilty. 

Nor  does  this  hypothesis  render  man  any  more  accountable  for  his 
sins;  for,  if  the  thing  formed  should  say  to  him  that  formed  it,  *'Thou 
formedst  me  at  first  indeed  very  good — but  liable  to  mutation  from 
good  to  evil;  Author,  of  my  mutable  nature,  why  didst  thou  make  me 
thus!*'  And  the  Creator  should  say,  by  way  of  excuse,  "Iknew  not 


3S 

the  consequences  of  these  liabilities,  or  my  goodness  v/ould  never 
have  permitted  me  to  have  made  thee  thus;"  then  the  thing  formed 
might  reply;  *'But,  my  Maker,  do  not  blame  me  for  thy  ignorance, 
and  least  of  all,  for  thy  wilful  ignorance;  it  was  thy  will  to  be  ignorant 
and  who  hath  resisted  thy  will?  Why  dost  thou  yet  find  fault?  Why 
didst  thou  determine,  ignorantly  to  form  me  thus?"  It  therefore  re- 
moves no  ditficuky;  and  is  an  outrage  on  all  reasonable  ideas  of  infi- 
nite wisdom;  because  wisdom,  according  to  our  habits  of  thinking, 
can  no  more  exist  without  knowledge,  than  a  house  without  the  ma- 
terials of  which  it  is  composed — knowledge  furnishes  the  materials  on 
which  wisdom  operates.  And  worst  of  all,  it  contradicts  the  Bible. 
In  this  divine  Book  we  are  taught  that  God  foretells  the  particular 
sins  of  particular  men  before  they  are  in  being — as  the  sins  of  the 
Egyptians,  in  oppressing  the  Israelites;  and  the  deeds  of  the  accu- 
sers, betrayer,  and  crucifiers  of  our  Lord.  It  is  literally  opposed  to 
the  text  which  declares  "•Known  unto  God  are  all  his  xoorksfrom  the 
foundation  of  the  world.*^ — Acts  xv,  18.  In  short,  it  is  a  doctrine 
hard  to  be  believed,  and  good  for  nothing  if  it  should  find  credence — 
It  is  without  the  support  of^a  single  text  in  the  Bible;  and  it  has  been  shown 
to  remove  no  difficulty.  As  these  remarks  are  all  made,  on  the  supposition 
that  the  distinction,  between  the  attribute  and  the  act  of  foreknowledge, 
discovered  by  the  fanciful  teachers  of  this  whimsical  doctrine,  is  true;  and 
on  that  supposition,  prove  the  hypothesis  unscriptural  and  useless,  any  exa- 
mination of  that  super-refined  discovery  is  superfluous. 

c 

Some  perhaps  will  consider  this  doctrine,  as  limiting  the  Creators 
power.  But  if  you  sav  he  might  have  made  a  more  perfect  system — one 
not  only  sinless  as  it  fell  from  his  hand;  but  that  would  remain  so 
for  ever — and,  that  he  yet  chose  the  present  with  all  its  foreseen  sins  and 
miseries,  you  elevate  his  power  at  the  expence  of  his  goodness.  We  do  not 
set  bounds  to  his  power.  He  may  have  power,  which  from  a  regard  to  his 
other  perfections  he  will  never  exercise.  He  may  have  power  to  deny  him- 
self; but  the  exercise  of  that  power  is  forbidden  by  his  truth.  So  also  he 
may  have  power  to  create  a  more  perfect  system;  but  the  exercise  of  that 
power  may  be  forbidden  by  his  other  perfections. 

This  view  of  the  subject  is  not  advocating  the  opinion  of  The  Great  Mo- 
ral Poet  that  "Whatever  is,  is  right,"  but  proving  that  in  the  best  possible 
system,  there  may  be,  unavoidably  on  the  part  of  the  Creator,  some  things, 
wrong. 


A,  M.  SCHEE,  PKlNTERv 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER. 


Vol.  I.  JUr.Y,   18^7.  No.  2. 


COMlJ>rG  TO  CHRIST. 

Ye  will  not  come  unto  me,  that  ye  might  have  life — JohnV,  40. 

The  image  of  (rod  in  the  soul,  lost  by  the  fall,  is  the 
spiritual  life  of  which  man  is  now  naturally  destitute. 
The  recovery  of  this  is  the  object  contemplated  in  the 
text.  It  made  no  part  of  our  original  constitution;  but 
was  produced  by  the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
directed  all  the  human  powers  to  the  service,  and  the 
glory  of  the  Creator.  But  when  offended  by  transgres- 
sion^  this  sacred  inhabitant  departed  from  his  terrestial 
tenement^  all  these  powers  became  deranged  from  their 
proper  order,  and  perverted  from  their  proper  ends; 
and  thus,  not  because  man  by  his  fall  lost  any  of  his 
constitutional  powers,  or  propensities;  but  because  of 
their  derangement  and  perversion,  his  whole  head  is  said 
to  be  sick,  and  his  whole  heart  faint.  Consequently, 
the  restoration  of  this  image,  is  not  the  implanting  of 
any  new  faculty  or  passion,  but  is  such  a  work,  effected 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  recovers  the  soul  from  its  de- 
rangement and  perversion,  a-nd  places  every  original 
principle  of  the  man  in  its  proper  subordination  and  di- 
rects it  to  its  proper  object. 

The  text  supposes  life  not  given,  that  men  may  come; 
but  their  coming  required  to  obtain  life.  The  topics  pro- 
posed for  consideration,  are  the  act  of  coming  to  Christy 
and  the  reason  why  men  do  not  come.  Each  of  them 
will  furnish  matter  for  a  separate  discourse. 

I.  The  act  of  coming  to  Christ.  Imagine  a  fine  ship, 
well  manned  and  equipped,  and  under  the  direction  of 
one,  who  is  at  once  a  wise  and  good  commander,  and 
an  experienced  and  skilful  navigator — one  who  would 
employ  the  best  means  to  mainrain  the  most  harmonious  \ 
discipline  among  the  crew,  and  who  could  traverse  the 
Ocean  with  the  most  perfect  safety.      Such  was  man  ia 


34 

K(ien,  M'hen  liis  sniil  wns  consecrated  by  the  inbabita- 
tiou  of  the  Hol^'  Ghost,  whose  divine  infiuence  govern- 
ed his  powers  and  guided  his  way.     Imagine  tlie  crew 
to  mutiny  and  (heir  captain,  righteously,  to  desert  them 
for  their  rtbellion,  and  to  U'ave  them  to  all  the  disorders 
of  their  faction  and  to  the  wild  mercy  of  the  winds  and 
the  waves,  without  a  compass  and  without  a  guide;  un- 
til the  ship  is  dashed  anO  injured,  and  the  crew  wearied 
and  wounded  by  the  distractions  of  mutiny,  and  wea- 
kened by    hunger   and  disease,  and  all   very  far  gone 
from  the  right  course;  and  just  ready  to  be  thrown  and 
lost  on    rocks  and  quicksands.     Such    is   fallen    man, 
his  native  powers  not  lost,  but  weakened  and  impaired 
by  perver.'^iou   and  abuse;  himself  far  estranged  from 
the  right  way,  and  exposed  to  the  shipwreck  of  reme- 
diless ruin.     And  suppose    the  commander,  moved  by 
the  spirit  of  compassion  and  forgiveness,  and  embarked 
in  the  ark  of  mercy,  should  linger  around  and  elevate 
his  trumpet,  long  and  loud,  now,  to  warn  them  of  their 
danger,  and  again,  to  address  them  in   the  tones  of  ex= 
postulation  and  entreaty,  to  permit  him  again  on  board, 
and  again,  to  submit  to  Ids  guidance,  that  he  might  rec- 
tify their  disorders  and  effect  their  escape  from  the  wide 
yawn  of  near   approaching  destruction.      Such  is   the 
Saviour  in  the  calls  of  his  providence,  his  word,  and  his 
Spirit,  to  apostate  man.       His  language,  is  "to  you,  O 
men,  I  call  and  my  voice  is  to  the  sons  of  men/'    Now 
imagine  that  convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  warning,  that 
proclaims  their  danger,  and  alarmed  at  the  view  of  its 
near  approach — out  of  no  love  for  iheir  commander  or 
for  order  or  virtue — but  entirely  from  a  love  of  life  and 
a  sense  ot"  danger,  they  should  prostrate  themselves  be- 
fore him,  and  implore  his  return,  and  his  government, 
and  guiclaiice,  to  rescue  them  from  death.     Such  is  the 
act  of  the  sinner,  when  convicted  of  his  sins,  and  fear- 
ing his  danger,  he  comes  to  Christ,  that   he  may  have 
life.     He  trembles,  he  weeps,  and  he  prays,  not  because 
the  Saviour,  against  whom  his  sins  have  been  commit- 
ted, appears  to  him  altogether  lovely,  or  his  law  holy, 


35 

just,  and  e;oo(l,  or  his  yoke  easy,  and  his  huiden  light; 
but  he  trembles,  liecause  he  believes  that  ^^indignation 
and  wrath,  tribulation  and  anguish,"  are  proclaimed  a- 
gainst  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil;  lie  weeps,  be- 
cause 'Hhe  pains  of  hell"  have  <^gat  hold  on  him;"  and 
Jie  prays,  because  he  would  be  saved  from  devouring 
flames^  and  escape  from  everlasting  burnings. 

And  finally,  suppose  the  commander,  at  the  selfish 
and  undeserving  entreaties  of  the  guilty  crew,  should 
re-enter  the  distracted  sliip,  restore  all  to  peace  and  or- 
der, and  by  an  influence  more  than  human,  win  the 
hearts  of  the  formerly  rebellious,  and  change  their  ha- 
tred  against  himself  and  each  other  into  love,  and  regain 
their  course  and  conduct  them  to  their  desired  shore. 
So  at  the  prayer  of  the  convicted  and  awakened  sinner 
— though  it  is  not  a  prayer  which  rises  to  the  standard 
of  the  divine  law — not  the  prayer  of  a  faith  which 
works  by  love  and  purifies  the  heart — though  it  .arise 
from  a  mere  conviction,  that  without  aid  from  on  high, 
to  repent  and  believe  aright,  he  must  perisli  forever;  the 
Saviour  according  to  his  eternal  purpose  in  the  merciful 
dispensation  of  the  Gospel;  by  the  operations  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  creates  a  new  heart  and  renews  a  right  spirit 
and  thus,  brings  all  the  native  powers  and  propensities 
of  the  man,  into  a  willing  subjection  to  the  love  of  God, 
and  guides  him  in  the  way  that  leads  to  glory  and  im= 
mortality.  Thus  a  sinner  comes  to  Christ,  when  con- 
victed €>f  sin,  by  the  outward  means  of  grace,  and  the 
common  operations  of  the  Spirit,  and  alarmed  at  his 
danger,  he  importunately  and  perseveringly  desires^ 
and  prays  God,  to  enable  hiniy  by  worlcingin  him  both  to 
will  and  to  do  of  his  good  jAeasure,  to  escape  from  the 
wrath  to  come. 

But  as  many  suppose,  that  men  never  come  to  Christ, 
until  spiritual'life  is  given,  the  doctrine  just  asserted  and 
illustrated  demands  the  confirmation  of  the  following  ar- 
guments: 

The  text  intimates,  that  obtaining  life  is  a  certain 
consequence  of  coming  to  Christ,  and  undoubtedly  the 


36 

Saviour  elsewhere  proclaims,  that    ^^him  that  comcth 
UDto  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out.''* 

The  outward  means  of  grace,  and  the  commoQ  ope- 
rations  of  the  Spirit,  undeniably  produce  on  the  minds 
of  thousands,  who  were  become  new  creatures  in  Christ 
Jesus,  convictions  of  sin  and  fears  of  punishment.  Now 
if  God  has  constituted  no  connexion  between  that  de- 
sire to  be  saved,  which  often  results  from  the  convic- 
tions and  the  fears  naturally  produced  by  these  means 
and  operations  on  the  minds  of  the  unregenerate, 
then  so  far  as  obtaining  spiritual  life  and  eternal  sal- 
vation is  concerned,  they  must  be  perfectly  nugato 
ry,  nay  worse;  because,  by  awful  forebodings,  they 
frequently  enkindle  in  men's  minds,  the  fires  of  future 
woe,  without  being  at  all  suited  to  effect   their  escape. 

So  that  except  designed  as  the  mere  ministers  of  time, 
to  throw  restraints  on  men,  and  thus  to  subserve  the  in- 
terests  of  the  present  world,  they  not  only  appear  useless 
but  mcmZess;  because,  ihx^^disciylinary,  becomes  then  a 
vindicatory  world,  and  from  a  theatre  of  preparation 
for  a  future  state,  it  is  changed  into  a  place  of  retribu- 
tion for  crimes.  But  unless  adapted  to  promote  the  de- 
sign of  redemption  by  bringing  sinful  men  near  their 
God,  why  employed  by  infinite  wisdom?  Shall  the  mea- 
nest insect  not  live  in  vain,  and  showers  not  fall  useless 
on  barren  deserts,  unadorned  by  the  meanest  shrubs, 
and  shall  God's  word  return  to  him  void,  and  his  Spirit 
operate  without  a  purpose? 

Again,  the  Scriptures  continually  describe  God's  dea- 
lings with  men  in  this  world  as  disciplinary, and  as  conn* 
terjiarts  of  his  system  of  salvation — Are  the  inhabitants 
of  the  old  world  overwhelmed  Uy  a  flood,  and  the  cities 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  consumed  in  lire?  It  is  for  an 
ensample  for  them  that  after  should  live  ungodly.f  Are 
God's  judgments  abroad  in  the  earth?  It  is,  that  the  in- 
habitants of  the  world  may  learn  righteousness?  f^aj  Is 
the  earth  filled  with  the  goodness  of  the  Lord?  It  is, 

•John  VI.  37.  t2  Pet.  II.  6.    a.  Isaiah  XXVI.  9. 


37 

because  the  goodness  of  God  should  lead  to  repen 
tance.  (b)  Are  prophets,  and  wise  men  and  scribes, 
from  age  to  age  sent  to  plead  the  cause  of  God  with  the 
disobedient  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem?  It  is  because  the 
Redeemer  would  gather  th^ra  as  a  heu  gatbereth  her 
chickeos  uuder  her  wings,  (c) 

Now,  if  there  be  an  established  connexion  between 
that  desire  of  escaping  from  wrath,  which  these  dispen- 
sations of  God,  by  convictions  and  alarms  often  produce 
on  the  minds  of  natural  men,  and  their  obtaining  that 
spiritual  change  by  which  they  are  released  from  con- 
demnation,  and  be2;in  to  live  for  Heaven,  then  the  sig- 
nificancy  of  these  representations,  are  awfully  obvious; 
but  if  not,  their  relevancy  is  obscure  and  their  force  and 
their  meaning  dwindle. 

And  moreover,  why  in  lands  unblest  by  the  showers 
and  the  sunshine  of  these  common  means  of  Christiani- 
ty— instead  as  in  christian  countries—  of  fields  waiving 
with  Gospel  fruits,  and  the  light  of  the  Sun  of  righteous- 
ness reflected  from  mount  Zion  by  a  thousantl  domes 
that  rest  upon  her  summit,  do  we  see  such  wide  sprea- 
ding, fruitless  and  dreary  wastes,  and  the  night  of  death 
resting  on  every  mountain  top,  and  lengthening  and 
thickening  its  shades  over  every  valley  and  every  plain, 
presenting  a  horrible  scenery  with  scarce  a  light  to  relieve 
the  eye,  but  the  fires  kindled  by  superstition  to  roast  her 
infants  and  to  burn  her  widows?  If  there  be  no  connexion 
[between  the  importunate,  and  the  persevering  seeking 
prompted  by  the  terrors  of  God,  often  thrown  over  the 
minds  of  the  impenitent  by  these  ( ommon  means  accom- 
panied by  the  Spirit;  why  did  the  apostles  in  obedience  to 
the  mandate  of  their  risen  Lord,  *Goye  into  ail  the  world 
and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature,'  at  the  expense 
of  toil  and  blood,  and  at  the  peril  of  life  itself,  traverse 
the  then  known  three  quarters  of  the  globe?  And  why 
did  the  Master  give  them  the  imperious  commission? 
And  why,  in  heathen   lands,  among  the  worshi!?pers  of 

b.  Rom.  II.  4.      c.  Matt,  XXIII.  37> 


38 

the  ISiie  and  the  Ganges — among  the  devotees  that  sur- 
round Jug;;arnaut  or  that  bow  at  the  feet  of  the  Grand 
Lama,  do  we  not  witness  the  outpourings  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  abundant  conversions  fr(mi  the  worship  of  i- 
dols  to  the  service  of  the  living  God? 

Jt  however  will  probably  !)«  said,  that  God  indeed 
more  frequently  regenerates  the  souls  of  such  as  are 
made  anxious  in  the  use  of  these  means,  and  with  rest- 
less and  continued  importunity,  call  on  him  for  grace, 
with  the  same  kind  of  natural  desire  as  that  which  the 
lavens  cry  for  food;  yet  there  is  no  certainty  that  such 
seekers  shall  all  ultimately  find  him.  Is  this  all?  Is 
the  anxious  sinner  to  be  encouraged  by  a  mere  parad- 
venture?  How  agrees  this  with  facts? — The  Gospel  is 
sent  to  heathen  lands,  its  nature  and  its  designs  are  ex- 
plained to  the  understanding,  and  its  requirements  urged 
home  to  the  heart;  some  of  the  savage  hearers  are  im- 
pressed, and  tears  roll  from  their  eyes;  they  go  away 
and  think  of  these  things,  and  the  feelings  of  guilt 
strengthen  their  hold,  and  the  fears  of  hereafter  haunt 
their  daily  walks  and  (heir  nightly  slumbers.  They 
determine  to  hear  more  of  this  word — the^'  become  more 
and  more  impiirtunate,  and  they  persevere;  and  all  that 
])ersevcre  find  pardon  and  peace.  Most  surely  then, 
there  must  be  some  certainty  between  the  awakened  sa- 
vage's desire  to  escape  from  misery,  and  his  attainment 
of  the  end;  or  why  do  we  not  read  of  forests,  vocal  with 
the  mourfiiiig  of  those,  who  have  sotight  the  Saviour, 
but  cannot  find  him?  And  we  may  add,  why  are  notour 
chtjrches  filled  with  the  waitings,  and  ilooded  with  the 
tears  of  awakened  and  anxious  sinners,  who  for  scores  of 
years,  have  importunitely,  and  jierseveringly.  implored 
God  for  assistance  to  become  pious:  but  have  received 
no  answer  to  their  entreaties?  such  a  convicted,  impor- 
tunate, aud  perseveringly  seeking  sinner  treads  not  the 
footst'x)!  of  God.  Such  is  the  wondiM-ful  (oincirlencc 
between  the  seeking  of  the  unrenewed  man  and  his  ob- 

tainiuir  mer^v. 

~  %, 

5jut  above  all  it  is  certain  that  God  has  regarded  the 


39 

iinpoHunate  and  pcrj^evering  entreaties  of  unrenewed 
men,  who  were  so  affected  by  liis  providence,  or  his 
word,  as  to  desire  his  interposition.  He  answered  tho 
prayer  of  Manasseh,  {a)  and  the  Ninivites,  {h)  and  Cor- 
nelius, (c)  andwith  light  and  life,  met  the  inquiries  of  tho 
anxious  jailor,  (d)  and  also  of  (he  Jews,  who  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  [jricked  to  the  hearts  by  the  preaching 
of  8t.  Peter,  solemnly  inquired,  what  shall  we  do?  (e) 
And  if  the  prayer  of  ASanasseh  and  the  Ninivites  are 
supposed  to  have  been  confined  to  temporal  m.eicie?, 
which  were  however  undeniably  granted,  the  argument 
is  only  strengthened,  for  much  more  would  tiipy  have 
been  answered,  ifthoy  had  been  made  for  spiritual  things. 
On  this  subject,  the  testimony  of  the  Saviour  is,  "'Ask. 
and  it  shall  be  given  you;  seek  and  ye  shall  find;  knock 
and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you.'' (/)  And  if  it  be  suppo- 
sed, that  this  relates  to  none,  but  such  as  are  already  re 
animated  with  the  divine  life,  the  refutation  is  found  in 
our  Lord's  own  words:  ^'Jt^very  one  that   asJceih  recei- 

And  finally,  this  doctrine  corresponds  with  the  ^C{\ 
nomy  of  the  Gospel,  not  only  as  it  relates  to  man's  con- 
dition; but  also  to  the  principles  of  his  nature.  Though 
depraved,  he  still  possesses  a  conscience;  by  the  means 
of  grace  before  regeneration,  this  conscience  is  ad- 
dressed on  the  subjects  of  guilt  and  danger;  and  if  these 
addresses  are  permitted  to  have  their  proper  efft  ct,  it  is 
stung  with  a  sense  of  guilt  and  alarmed  by  the  appre- 
hension of  danger.  And  the  whole  Gospel  epitomised 
— ^*He  that  believeth  and  is  baptised  shall  be  saved  and 
he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned,''(/i)  is  addressed 
to  the  strongest  principle  of  fallen  man:  the  sjjpreme 
love  of  self.  And  through  the  power  of  this  principle, 
wlien  aroused  by  the  threatenings  of  Jehovah,  the  unre- 
newed man  bends  to  the  cross  of  the  Kedeemer,  and 
calls  for  mercy,  not  beiauso  he  hates  God  less;  but  be- 
cause he   hates  eternal   torments  more.     And   surely, 


a.  2  Chron.  XXXIII.  13.  b.  Jonah  III.  10.  c  Acts  X.  4-  d.  Act". 
XVI.  SO  e.  Acts  II.  37,  f.  Matt.  VII.  7.  g.  Matt.  VII.  8.  h.  Mark 
XVI.  16. 


40 

surely,  it  appears  at  least,  as  consistent  with  the  Divine 
character,  to  bestow  mercy  on  the  sinner,  when  by  the 
means  of  supreme  appointment,  he  has  I)een  made  to 
feel  his  need  of  mercy:  as  to  obtrude  it  on  him  when  he 
Hc£;lects  those  means,  and  despises  that  mercy. 

And  the  declaration  of  Christ,  that,  *'no  man  can 
come  unto  me  except  the  Father  who  hath  sent  me  draw 
him,"  (ft)  is  no  objection  to  the  position  here  maintain- 
ed. It  is  held  that  the  word,  providence,  and  JSpirit  of 
God,  by  addressing  the  principles  of  the  natural  man. 
and  creatine;  the*  feelings  of  guilt  and  terror,  lead  the 
sinner  to  call  for  mercy;  and  it  is  averred,  that  these  are 
the  drawings  of  the  Father,  without  which  no  man  can 
come  to  Clirist. 

Nor  is  the  case  of  Lydia.  (/>)  whose  heart  the  Lord 
opened,  to  attend  to  the  tilings  spoken  by  Paul,  or 
that  of  Paul,  (c)  himself,  who  was  struck  down  by  a 
light  from  Heaven,  when  so  far  from  seeking  mercy,  he 
was  breathing  out  threatening  and  slaughter  against  the 
Christians,  and  in  the  pursuit  of  a  high-handed  and  bloo- 
dy persecution,  any  argument  against  the  theory  here 
defended — Granting  all  that  an  adversary  in  this  argu- 
ment could  ask — That  Lydia,  when  one  of  the  most 
thoughtless  beings  within  the  range  of  God's  rational 
creation,  by  a  direct  act  of  the  Omnipotent  Spirit,  was 
arrested  and  made  a  new  creature,  and  that  the  renova- 
ting ei;ergy  from  on  high  touched  8auFs  heart;  as  soon 
as  the  divine  voice  reached  his  ears,  or  the  celestial  ra- 
diance his  eyes;  and  that  the  old  man  crucified  with  his 
aflections  and  lusts,  fell  with  the  persecutor  to  the 
ground;  and  we  only  admit  too  actual  cases,  with  the 
possibility  of  some  others  as  exceptions  to  a  general 
law. 

To  admit  any  thirjg  more,  w^ould  be  as  perfectly  gra- 
tuitous, as  to  grant,  that  because  the  sun  once  stood  still 
upon  Gibeoii,  and  the  moon  in  the  valley  of  Ajalon,  (d) 
there  is  no  law  to  guide  them  in  their  courses,  or  to  re- 
gulate their  settings  or  their  risings.     Deity  always  acts 


John  VI.    ?'7.  h.  Acts  >'V1  U.  c.  Acts  IZ.  3.  4,  5.  6.  d  Josh.  X,  15 ■ 


41 

in  consistency  with  his  own  perfections— he  cannot  de- 
ny himself.  In  both  the  natural  and  the  moral  world, 
it  may  be  agreeable  to  his  perfections,  occasionally,  to 
depart  from  the  usual  course  of  his  operations;  but  facts 
prove,  that  in  agreeableness  to  his  nature,  he  for  the 
most  part, 

•*Acts  not  by  partial,  bat  by  general  laws," 
But  there  is  nothing  related  of  Paul  or  Lydia,  that 
requires  the  case  eitlier  of  the  one  or  the  other  to  be 
classed  under  the  head  of  exceptions.  There  is  no 
proof  that  Saul  became  a  new  man,  when  by  a  voice 
and  a  light  from  heaven,  he  was  struck  to  the  ground. 
Here  was  indeed  irresistible  evidence  addressed  to  his 
mind,  that  in  persecuting  the  saints,  he  was  opposing 
the  King  of  heaven,  and  subjecting  himself  to  his  ire. 
As  a  consequence  of  this  evidence,  he  may  have  felt, 
and  acted  as  a  sinner,  absolutely  dependant  on  the  mer- 
cy ^f  Grod  in  Christ;  and  thus  have  been  met  with  ''the 
effectual  working  of  his  mighty  powpr*/'  by  which  the 
scales  fell  from  his  eyes.  And  as  to  Lydia,  when  Paul 
began  to  preach,  the  common  operations  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  may  have  attended  his  word  to  her  heart,  and 
she  may  have  yielded  to  the  convictions,  and  the  fears 
produced  on  her  mind  by  these  means;  and  in  the 
course  of  the  sermon,  acted  upon  them,  by  coming  to 
Christ  as  a  lost  sinner;  and  thus  obtained  life;  and  thus 
have  had  her  heart  opened  by  the  Lord  to  attend  to  the 
things  spoken  by  Paul. 

Nor  is  there  any  valid  argument  in  the  objection,  that 
such  a  coming  to  Christ,  is  but  the  act  of  an  unregene- 
rate,  and  consequently  of  a  wicked  man,  whose  very 
thoughts,{a)  sacrifices, (6)  and  prayers,(c)  are  an  abomi- 
nation to  the  Lord— of  a  man  who  regards  iniquity  in 
his  heart,(rf)  and  therefore  of  one,  whose  prayer  the 
Lord  will  not  hear. 

These  texts  here  alluded  to,  probably,  describe  those, 
who  allowedly  live  in  a  course  of  sin,  whose  thoughts 

aProv,  XV,  26.     bProv.  xv,  8.    cProv.  xxviii.  9.  dPs.  Ixri,  18. 

6 


are  alltAvctliy  wicked,  and  whose  sac riil*  es  and  prayers, 
are  tlieieloie  liy[)oci itical.  If  they  prove,  tluit  God 
will  iii»t  Ijear  tlie  |)rayers  of  tiie  anxious  sinner,  who 
<it'sires  to  be  saved  fioin  the  wratli  t »  come,  they  also 
prove,  that  he  will  not  hend  an  ear  to  any  prayer,  but 
that  of  hiiD,  who  is  abswlutely  sinless — every  other  may 
strictly  be  said,  in  ai>;reater  or  less  degree,  to  regard  ini- 
quity  in  his  heart.  ]5ut  this  whole  objection  is  founded 
on  a  mistake — that  God  legards  the  prayers  of  men, 
])ecause  they  are  hfdy:  but  the  truth  is,  he  hears  no 
man's  supplications,  because  they  are  accounted  pure  in 
his  holy  tsfiination;  for  if  judgment  be  laid  to  the  line, 
and  righteoustiess  to  tlie  pbimmet,  in  his  siglit,  no  flesh 
living  can  be  justified.  He  meets  no  individual  of  Ad- 
am's children,  l)ut  as  a  sinner,  and  on  the  ground  of  mercy 
through  a  Mediator.  The  liedeemer's  obedience  in  the 
sinner's  stead,  alone,  squares  with  the  line  of  judgment 
and  the  plummet  of  righteousness.  And  if  mercy*be 
the  only  ground  of  transaction  between  God  a!)d  man, 
surely,  a  sinner's  want  of  a  new  heart,  and  his  feeling 
that  want,  is  no  disqualification  to  l)is  becoming  a  sup- 
pliant party  on  that  ground.  The  belief  that  God  per- 
forms this  work,  when  the  sinner,  seized  by  the  terror 
of  future  wrath,  desires  this  change,  is  opposed,  be- 
cause, his  desires  and  his  prayers  are  said  to  be  an  a- 
bomination  to  God.  Then  to  give  this  objection  full 
sweep,  we  ought  to  suppose,  that  he  performs  this  ope- 
ration, when  the  sinner  is  the  most  indifferent,  or  the 
most  opposed  tosuch  a  change.  Strange! — is  his  indif- 
ference, or  !iis  opposition  to  salvation,  any  less  an  abo- 
mination to  God,  than  a  desire  to  be  saved? 

Also  the  manner  in  which  this  subject  has  just  been 
exhibited,  if  carefully  surveyed,  will  be  found  perfect- 
ly to  accord  with  that  |)assage  of  our  Confession  of 
Faith,  which  affirms,  that  in  this  change,  man  i«<  ^^alto- 
geiher  2msswe.^\a)  Our  representation  of  the  case  is, 
that  the  sinner  must  first  come  to  Christ,  and  then  the 
8|)irit  of  God  effects  on  his  soul  that  transformation, 

aConfession  of  Faith  chap,  x,  sec  2. 


43 

which  produces  spiritual  life.  Now  as  a  man  diseasod 
by  a  cancer,  may  he  active  in  goiuii;  to  a  physician,  an<S 
yet  be  perfectly  passive  in  the  operation,  wliich  removes 
the  disease,  so  a  sinner  may  be  active  in  i^oin£;to  ('hrisu 
that  he  may  have  life,  and  yet  be.  '♦altoS^ether  passive" 
in  the  spiritual  change  hy   which  it  is  produced. 

To  some,  no  doubt,  this  will  appear  to  give  the  saved 
sinner  somewhat  of  whicli  to  boast.  But  wliatcan  he 
the  ground  of  his  boasting?  That  he  has  oheyed  the 
divine  law  and  is  therefore  saved  for  his  own  merit? 
No,  verily — the  law  requires  love  to  God  with  all  tlie 
heart,  soul,  and  mind;  but  the  doctrine  represents  the 
sinner  as  desiring  to  be  born  again — not  because  he 
loves  God  at  all;  but  because  he  loves  himself  and 
hates  eternal  misery.  Suppose  that  in  heaven,  lie 
should  begin  an  anthem  to  himself  for  his  salvation; 
what  would  be  his  language?  "Praise  to  me,  that  out 
of  pure  love  to  myself,  and  in  perfect  disobedience  to 
God's  holy  law,  which  righteously  demands  my  su- 
preme affection — praise-  praise  to  me^  that  out  of  mere 
love  to  myself,  and  in  a  state  of  absolute  hatred  to  my 
Maker,  Preserver  and  Redeemer,  when  convinced  hy 
the  means  of  his  mercy,  that  if  I  continued  my  rebel- 
lions against  him,  1  must  eventually  sink  under  the 
wrathful  arm  of  his  power;  like  a  warrior,  who  asks 
quarters  from  his  enemy,  when  he  sees  resistance  would 
eventuate  in  his  own  ruin,  1  laid  down  my  weapons 
from  fear  and  begged  the  God  whom  1  basely  hated,  to 
have  mercy  upon  me — praise  to  myself,  that  God  had 
mercy  upon  me  a  sinner!!"  The  most  that  such  a  sin- 
ner could  say  in  praise  of  his  own  merit,  is  that  his  sin- 
ful desire  of  mercy,  was  not  so  guilty  as  anotbers  s/?7/«/ 
rejection  of  mercy.  So  that,  according  to  this  doctrine, 
the  former  achieves  no  merit  and  deserves  no  reward; 
but  the  latter,  by  his  rejection  incurs  great  guilt  and  de- 
serves deep  condemnation. 

Nor  is  there  any  disagreement  between  this  expla 
nation  of  the  doctrine  of  coming  to  ('hrist^,  and  ano 


4I< 

(her  portion  of  onr  Confession  of  Faith  uhicli  teaches, 
that  *'God  chooses  men  not  from  any  foresight  (if  faitii, 
or  good  works,  or  any  other  thing,  foreseen  in  tlie  crea- 
ture, as  a  condition  or  a  cause  moving  him  thereto."(rt) 
It  has  already  heen  shown,  in  this  discourse,   that  the 
coming  of  an  unregenerate  man  to  Christ,  in  tiie  sense 
here  explained,  falls  short  of  the  standard  of  the  divine 
law,  and  therefore,  if  compared    with   it,  cannot  be  a 
good  work,  and  that  the  belief  upon  wiiich  the  man  acts, 
in  this  coming — is  not  the  faith  demanded  by  the  scrip- 
tures— is  not  a  faith  which  works  by  love;  and  hence 
the  theory  here  advocated,  supposes  that  God  gives  life 
to  the   sinner;  not  on  acrount  of  faith,  or  good  works, 
previously  possessed.     And  as  it  is  humbly  believed  to 
liave  been  deraonstrated,  in  a  former  di-scourse,*  that, 
between  God's  foreknowledge  of  the   free  acts  of  the 
creature,  and  his  determinations  in  regard  to  those  acts, 
there  are  no  such   relations  as  antecedent  and   conse- 
quent, either  in  the  order  of  duration  or  of  reason;  ac- 
cording to  this  theory,   nothing  in   the  creature  could 
have  operated  on  the  mind  of  Deity  as  a  cause  or  con- 
dition, to  influence  him  when  in  his  eternal  plan  he  de- 
termined to  bestow  life  upon  the  anxious,  seeking  sin- 
ner; for  a  condition  or  cause  must,  both  in  the  order  of 
reason  and  duration,  precede  that,  of  which  it  is  a  con- 
dition or  a  cause. 

And  so  far  from  opposing ^  our  doctrine  demands  a 
literal  interpretation  of  the  scriptures,  that  giays  "He 
will  have  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy.''*(ft)  In 
the  usual  course  of  his  saving  operations,  he  will  have 
mercy  on  all  those,  and  those  only  on  w  hom  he  may 
have  mercy,  consistently  with  all  his  moral  perfections 
— on  such  as  improve  the  instructions  of  his  Gospel,  and 
the  threatenings  of  his  law,  and  the  application  of  these 
instructions  and  threatenings,  made  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  his  common  optrations,  to  their   consciences — ia  a 

aConfession  of  Faith,  chap,  iii,  ^c.  5. 

*See  No.  1,  page  8^  and  note  A.  at  the  end  of  the  sermon. 

bRom.  ix,  15. 


45 

way  perfectly  within  the  iiiiregeneratod  powers  of  the 
natural  man — so  as  to  throw  aside  the  outward  immo- 
ralities or  a  wicked  life — so  as  to  feel  the  workinejs  of  a 
sin-smitten  conscience  shuddering  with  the  forehodings 
of  a  judgment  to  come — and  so  as  with  all  the  importu- 
nity of  a  sinking  Peter,  to  cry  out,  "Help  Lord  or  1 
perish,"  or  of  the  sightless  Bartimeus,  "Jesus  thou  son 
€f  David  have  mercy  on  me," 

From  this  exposition  of  our  text,  we  are  able  to  recon- 
cile the  scriptures  which  say,  '^It  is  God,  ivhich  war- 
li'eth  in  you,  both  to  icill  and  to  do  of  his  good  flea 
sure,^^  (a)  ''you  hath  he  quickened  who  were  dead  ia 
trespasses  and  sins/'  (b)  "Jesus  ivhich  hath  delivered 
us  from  the  wrath  to  come/*  (c)  "a  new  heart  also  will 
Igive  you  and  a  new  Spirit  will  I  put  within  you/'  (d) 
with  others  whose  language  is,  "  H'ork  out  your  own 
salvation f^  [e)  ''arise  from  the  dead;^'  (/)  ''flee  from 
the  wrath  to  come;''  (g)  "make  you  a  new  heart  and  a 
new  Spirit."  {h)  And  this  apparently  discrepant  lan- 
guage, is  just  as  literally  reconciled,  as  the  saying  "that 
a  farmer  raises  a  crop  of  corn,"  is  with  the  proposition 
that  <4n  the  growth,  and  the  formation  of  the  grain,  the 
farmer  is  altogether  passive,  and  the  production  wholly 
a  work  of  divine  power."  The  farmer  indeed  supported 
by  God's  providence,  ploughs  the  ground  and  plants 
the  seed;  but  in  the  plan  of  Jehovah  this  is  only  an  an- 
tecedent to  the  production.  Then  the  same  unseen, 
Almighty  hand  that  first  formed  grass  and  herbs,  conti- 
nues his  creation,  and  without  the  farmer's  assistance, 
the  blade  shoots,  the  stalk  rises,  and  the  corn  matures?  so 
the  unregenerate  sinner,  convicted  by  the  law  and  awed 
by  the  terrors  of  God,  unceasingly  calls  for  mercy;  but 
this  is  only  an  antecedent  to  regeneration.  Then  in  the 
merciful  dispensation  of  grace,  the  same  Spirit,  that 
moved  in  the  night  of  Chaos,  and  brooded  on  the  face  of 
the  waters,  and  produced   light  and  order  among  the 

aPhil.  ii,  12.     bEph  ii,  1      cl.  Thes.  i,  10      dEzekiel  xxxvi,  26. 
ePhil.  ii,  12.    f  Matt,  iii,  7,    gEph.  v,  14.    hEzekiel  xriii,  31. 


46 

il.U'k  JHu]  crude  maffrink.  without  any  co-operation  of 
Hie  siotHM',  corrects  the  disorders  nnd  dispels  the  dark- 
ness of  this  moral  chaos,  and  creates  him  a  new  crea- 
ture. Thus  io  the  Ianp;iia2;"  of  common  life,  an  nore- 
nf^wed  man  may  he  just  as  literally  exhorted  to  make 
liim  a  new  heart  as  a  farmer  to  rear  a  crop.  In  cither 
case  the  man  hut  performs  an  anfecedent,  which  God  is 
pleaded  to  follow  with  an  oj)erution,  exclusively  his  own. 
In  the  popular  laii2;uage  of  the  Bi!)le,  the  man  who  fol- 
lows the  crmrse,  which  God  has  appointed  to  ohtnin  this 
spiritual  chano;e;  as  literally  makes  him  a  new  heart;  as 
he  rears  a  harvest,  who  performs  that  process,  which  is 
usually  crowned  with  the  productions  of  the  field;  whilst 
in  the  strict  language  of  the  jjihle,  as  well  as  in  tiie 
accurate  language  of  Christian  philosophy,  it  is  lite^ 
rally  true,  that  God  gives  a  new  heart,  and  that  God 
loads  the  fields  with  the  bounties  of  the  year. 

And  if  these  things  I)e  so,  the  minds  of  anxious  sin- 
iiers  ought  not  to  he  distracted  with  theological  subtle- 
ties and  paradoxes — such  as  whether,  if  they  are  note- 
lected,  they  may  not  be  lost  though  they  feel  their  need 
of  a  Saviour  never  so  deeply,  and  never  so  earnestly  and 
inces.*^antly  knock  at  the  door  of  mercy — whether  they 
may  pray  before  they  have  repented  and  believed — 
whether  they  may  not  have  committed  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  therefore  not  obtain  life  though  they 
should  come  to  Christ — and  whether  they  ought  to  at- 
tempt to  believe  or  repent  or  to  make  to  themselves  a 
new  beart  lest  they  presumptuously  intrude  upon  the 
]u*ovincc  of  a  jealous  God;  but  they  should  be  taught 
that  it  makes  a  part  of  God's  eternal  purpose  to  elect  thfe 
very  sinners  that  convicted  of  their  iniquities  and  convin- 
ced, that  if  the  Redeemer  saves  not,  they  are  lost,  and 
that  acting  upon  this  convi(  tion,  gives  him  no  rest,  but 
day  and  night  beseech  his  deliverance  from  the  wrath  to 
comp;  that  in  jiraypr  and  every  other  religious  exercise 
in  which  they  engage,  they  ought  immediately  to  believe 
and  repent — that  no  sin  can  condemn  the  soul  that  comes 
to  Him  whose  blood  cleanseth  from  all  sin — and  that  it 


47 

is  tbf  *TS  to  endpavoiir  in  depenilence  on  divine  j^race,  to 
believo,  rt  pent,  and  ohtain  a  uew  heart;  hwi  Ciiod's  to 
give  cijicacy  to  these  eiwleavonrs;  just  as  it  was  for  the 
aaiaii  with  the  withered  hand  to  attemjjt  to  >stiettli  it 
forths  hut  for  Christ  to  irive  succesiy  to  the  attempt. 

What  encourage nsent  Tor  anxious  sonU!  That  he  who 
inhabits  the  hight'st  heaven;  occupies  a  th.rone  to  which 
%n\  created  <!li;nify  can  climh;  is  clothed  with  the  myste- 
rious, the  awfnl,  and  the  infinite  majesty  of  the  Kins;  of 
kings;  ar.d  wliose  ears  are  greated  with  the  hnllelnjahs 
of  angelic  and  cheru!)ic  choirs — that  He  should  how  the 
Jjeaveiis  to  bear  the  cries  of  a  worm,  whose  very  prr^yer 
is  hut  the  foiced  tiihnte  of  a  selfish  and  a  slavish  fear; 
Ihe  very  accents  of  w  hich  are  formed  hy  an  unhallowed 
tongue,  and  horee  frt^B  i  is  lips  by  polluted  hreath,  may 
well  stagger  the  belief  of  a  trembling  sinner.  It  is  loo 
much  for  him  to  ask  so  inlinke  a  thing,  and  too  rrnich  to 
expect^  had  not  the  Almighty's  own  voice  poroclaimed 
^'The  Lord,  the  Lord  God,  merciful  and  grftcinns.^^ 

But  has  he  said,  that  him  that  cometh  uuto  me,  Iwill 
in  no  wise  cast  out,  and  shall  he  not  perform? 

O  turn  not  away  from  the  voice  that  warns  thongli  it 
utters  terrible  things.  On  the  mount  whence  roll  the 
thunders  of  condemnation  ami  wrath,  I  see  one,  like  the 
Sou  of  man,  standing  half  veiled  in  clouds;  in  his  hands 
he  holds  the  li2;htnings  that  flash  to  devour;  ar.d  I  bear 
him  say  in  a  still  small  voice,  to  which  all  nature  pau- 
ses to  listen^  and  w  hich  angels  stoop  to  hear — a  voice 
that  sileuces  the  thunders:  ^'IjOoJc  unto  me  and  he  ijp. 
saved,  all  the  ends  of  the  earth.^^  But  do  y(m  respond 
•*We  see  him  not — vv'ljere  sliall  we  find  mm? 

Keep  your  face  fixed*  to  the  mount  whence  your  ear 

*If  so  soon  as  the  face  of  the  anxious  sinner  is  kept  fixed,  he  is  met  by  Spi- 
ritual life,  this  language  intimates  no  delay  in  regatd  to  faith  and  repentance. 
If  a  sinner  be  ignorant,  he  ought  to  be  instructed;  if  careless,  alarmed;  and 
jf  anxious,  exhorted  to  come  to  Christ  immediately,  by  endeavouring  in  his 
strength,  to  exercise  an  evangelical  repentance  and  a  saving  faith.  It  is 
then  the  cry  of  the  sin-smitten  sinner  becomes  the  prayer  of  faith,  just  as  in 
the  miracle  of  the  Saviour,  the  attem.pt  of  the  luiibercd,  became  the  act  of  a 
sound  htirxd.  If  God  has  joined  seeking  and  finding  together,  to  exhort  a 
sinner  to  come  to  Christ  im,mei:ately,  is  to  exhort  him  to  repent  and  Mievr 
hmnediately. 


4S 

caught  the  alarm,  that  now  a:;Uates  your  frame,  and 
though  now  surrounded  by  dark  clouds  of  the  sky, 
which  no  unaided  mortal  eye  can  penetrate;  yet  soon 
shall  the  day  s|)ring  from  on  high  gihl  the  edges  of 
the  horizon,  the  ch)uds  break,  and  tlie  sha(h)ws  flee  a- 
way,  and  every  star  that  now  garnishes  the  hidden  ca 
nopy,  shall  becovne  a  sun  to  reveal  to  your  astonished 
eyes  a  gracious  Saviour  — O  turn  not  away — he  has  not 
said  to  the  seed  of  Jacob  seek  ye  my  face  in  vain — 
Amen. 


The  opposition  of  some  excellent  brethren  is  so  strong  to  even  the  name 
of  the  best  possible  moral  system,  that  they  have  actually  refused  to  read 
the  part  of  our  first  number  classed  under  that  head  Forthe  information  of 
such,  it  is  now  stated,  that  in  this  work,  the  best  possible  moral  system  is 
used  to  denote  that  system  in  which  there  is  *'tbe  least  possible  moral  evil,''* 
an  idea  almost  the  reverse  of  the  theory  usually  known  by  that  name— in- 
asmuch as  the  latter  supposes  that  the  present  system  is  made  good,  is  made 
the  best,  by  the  introduction  of  moral  evil. 

At  the  following  words  in  note  C  of  our  first  number  some  of  our  rea- 
ders have  taken  offence  "in  the  bost  possible  system  there  m,ay  be,  unavoida- 
bly, on  the  part  of  the  Creator,  *nm£  things  wrong."  This  is  it  supposed,  to  say 
the  least,  is  speaking  very  disrespectfully  of  Almighty  power.  As  it  is  found 
that  this  objection  is  made  by  almost  none,  b«t  those  who  have  turned  to  the 
note  but  have  not  read  the  sermon,  the  attention  of  our  readers  is  respectful- 
ly invited  to  the  pages,  16,  17,  18  and  19  of  "The  Christian  Preacher" 
No  1.  It  is  intended  in  the  course  of  this  work  to  treat  the  subject  more 
fully. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER. 


Vol.1.  SEP  rEMBER,  18^7.  No.  4* 


The  cause  and  the  design  of  God^s  giving  his  Sow. 

For  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son, 
that  whosoever  believeth  in  him,  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlas- 
ting life— John  iii,   1 6. 

lledemption  is  a  glorious  theme.  Originatina;  in  the 
bosom  of  divine  love,  planned  in  the  depths  of  infinite 
>visdoiD,  exenited  by  the  hand  of  omnipoteixe,  fulfil- 
ling the  predictions  of  truth,  meetins;  the  demands  of 
justice,  and  encircled  on  its  throne  with  all  the  lustre  of 
the  divine  mercy,  it  appears  to  call  into  requisition  every 
infinite  perfection,  and  to  concentrate  and  t(»  present  in 
one  view,  all  that  is  important  for  man  ia  this  world  to 
know  of  Deity. 

Viewed  by  finite  minds,  God's  perfections  might 
seem  unharmonious  and  unausjdcious — omnipotence, 
tyranny;  justice,  severity;  and  mercy,  weakness;  but 
now  blended  together  as  the  diversicoloured  rays,  and 
harmonized  in  the  plan  of  the  "great  salvation",  they 
constitute  the  glory  of  the  Supreme  Majesty,  the  light 
of  the  upper  heaven,  the  Sun  of  the  moral  universe, 
which  not  only  kindles  the  blaze  of  heavenly  noon  ia 
the  moral  midnight  of  this  earth,  biit  probably  rolls  the 
tides  of  celestial  day  to  illumine  and  bless  the  lemotest 
regions  of  moral  existence.  The  same  host  of  heaven- 
ly heralds,  that  hailed  the  night  of  the  Saviour's  na- 
nativity  with  the  song  of  peace  on  earth  and  good  will 
to  men,  may  have  sung  the  same  anthem  to  the  inhabi- 
tants of  other  spheres,  and  the  twelve  angelic  legions, 
who  stood  ready  to  vindicate  the  honour  of  their  insul- 
ted Lord,  may  have  been  commissioned  to  take  their 
flight  from  world  to  world,  to  publish  the  agonies  of  the 
garden  and  the  tragedy  of  the  cross;  and  to  explain  to 
the  astonished  universe,  why  nature  darkened,  paused, 
and  shook. 


71 

Hot  hn\vo\  rrelr^afino;f!iP  tl'OMglit,  tliat  onr  (j.hI  and 
l>is  Clnist.  are  known  n\M\  adored  hy  rjuniberless  other 
l)i'ini:;s  tl>roii£;hout  the  if»trlli«j:;pnt  armies  of  the  ujiiverse, 
who  lise  hii:;her  in  the  scah'  ofexi^tenc^^  tlum  ourselves; 
it  is  (ins,  to  cot»tHin(»late  Ucity  and  Redemption  main- 
ly in  reterence  to  onr  own  vvoild 

Fully  convinced  (»f  this  truth,  let  us  examine  the  two 
leading  ideas  comunmicated  tons  in  the  letter  of  the 
text— - 

T.  The  cause,  and 

11.  The  design  of  God's  giving  his  Son. 

1.  The  cause- -He  •*h>ved  the  world."  It  is  not 
taught  in  this  text,  or  in  any  other  part  of  the  Bihle,  that 
Cto<1  loves  every  human  being  in  the  same  degree.  In- 
deed as  a  holy  God,  who  hates  sin  and  loves  righteous- 
ness, this  would  be  impossible.  It  would  be  a  denial 
of  his  perfect  nature,  to  suppose,  that  he  cherished  the 
same  degree  of  affection  for  Judas  as  for  John,  or  for 
Pilate  as  for  Paul,  or,  that  he  who  changes  not  and  who 
views  things  that  ore  not  as  though  they  icere^  should 
love  a  man,  whom  he  eternally  views  as  an  enemy, 
never  reconciled,  as  much  as  one,  whom  he  eternally 
views  as  an  enemy  reconciled.  So.  that  while  it  is  be- 
lieved, that  God  in  the  donation  of  his  Son  loved  those 
whom  he  foresaw  as  redeemed,  sanctified,  and  saved, 
more  than  those  whom  he  foiesaw  as  crucifying  him,  and 
putting  him  to  an  open  shame^  and  retaining  against 
him  an  eternal  enmity;  still  it  is  susceptible  of  moral  de- 
monstration, that  He  loved  the  world. 

All  the  human  family  stand  alike  related  to  hira  as  an 
universal  parent.  All  are  alike  the  parts  of  the  divine 
workmanship,  fenrfally  and  ironderfu/ly  made.  And 
though  now  the  bright  gold  has  become  dim, still  it  is 
g<d(l;  although  the  gem  is  cast  into  the  mire,  still  it  is  a 
gem;  and  although  the  moral  workmanship  is  despoiled, 
yet  the  materials  are  precious.  And  the  Maker's  own 
testimony  is.  that  he  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the 
wicked:  and  that  it  h  good  and  acceptable  in  the  eyes  of 
God  our  Sai*ii)in%  that  supplications  and  prayers,  inter- 
cessions and  giving  of  thanks  he  made  for  all  men.    That 


7.'> 

the  Saviour  loved  the  wicked  whom  he  contemplated  a« 
his  on  n  certain  persecutors,  murderers,  and  etiMnally  ir- 
reconrileahle  enemies  is  pathetically  proclaimed  in  his 
apostrophe  to  Jerusalem—//*  thou  kadst  known,  evpn 
thou,  at  least  in  th^'s  thy  daij^  the  thirties  which  belong  un- 
tothyjjeacef  But  now  they  are  hid  from  thine  eyes,  if 
Jerusalem,  ,lerusa/em,  thou  that  kiflest  the  prophets  and 
stonest  them  which  are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often  would 
I  have  s:athered  thy  children  togther  as  a  hen  gatherelh 
her  chickens  under  her  wimcsl 

And  not  only  hy  the  verbal  expres>^ions  of  his  bene- 
volence and  the  effusion  of  his  tears;  hut  more  hy  the 
sorrows  of  Getlisemane,  the  blood  of  Caiv:ny.  and  tlie 
humiliation  of  the  sepulchrn,  he  dem^uistrated  a  love 
for  tlie  whole  world,  stron!j;er  than  death — fk  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  all.  As  every  word  of  God  is  a 
stone,  shaped  for  some  place  in  Zion's  bulwarks,  tow- 
ers, or  palaces  to  support,  streni^then,  or  adorn  them, 
it  is  indispensable  that  every  l)uilder  in  God's  house, 
who  would  not  have  his  works  burned  as  wood,  hay, 
and  stubble,  and  who  would  be  a  work raim,  that  needeth 
not  to  be  ashamed,  should  prayerfully  and  as  seeing  him 
who  IS  invisible,  endeavour  to  appropriate  each  to  its 
own  divinely  appointed  location.  And  especially  it  is 
indispensable,  in  regard  to  words  such  as  ransom^  pro- 
fitiation,  atonement,  SLnd  redemption,  which  relate  im- 
mediately to  the  Redeemer's  meditation,  and  thus  be- 
come  pillars  upon  which  the  fair  edifice  of  revealed  truth 
rests  its  foundatious — The  word  ransom  literally  signi- 
fies the  price  of  redemption  for  captives,  whether  it  be 
appropriated  and  accepted  so  as  to  become  efficient  for 
their  liberation  or  not.  He  will  not  regard  any  ransom. 
Then  a  great  ransom  cannnot  deliver  them.  In  these 
texts  a  ransom,  and  a  great  ransom,  is  described  as  not 
accepted,  and  therefore,  not  appropriated  to  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  captive.  The  idea  is  well  illustrated  in  the 
description,  which  Homer  gives  of  the  price  of  libera- 
ton,  brought  to  Agamemnon  by  Chryses,  the  priest  of 
Apollo  to  redeem  his  captive  daughter.  The  ransom 
offered  by  her  father,  for  her  redemption,  is  represented 


76 

by  the  poet,  as  infinite  in  value,  and  yet  it  was  rejected 
by  the  wrathful  Agamemnon,     This  however  did  not  al- 
ter its  value,  or  its  meaning;  in  the  wishes  of  the  parent; 
in  amount  it  was  all  sufficient  for  redemption,  and  it  was 
consecratedto  the  purpose  by  a  parent's  fondest  affections; 
and  in  the  song  of  the  poet  as  well  after  Agammenon's 
refusal  to  accept  it  for  the  redemption  of  the  captive,  as 
before,  it  is  called  tlie  infinite  ransom.     Though  a  thing 
may  be  properly  denominated  a  ransom,  whether  it  be 
formally  appropriated  and   accepted  as  the  price  for  the 
liberation  of  a  captive  or  not;  yet  it  never  properly  be- 
comes such,  until  set  apart  tnrthi^  purp(icie,  by  the  wishes 
of  him,  who  would    redeem;  or  until  olTeriMl  by   bin}  in 
the  place  of  the  captive.     This  is  but  a  plain  inference 
from  the  texts  just  cited,  as  well  as  from  the  passage  in 
Homer's  Illiad.  just  alluded  to.     lu  the  one  text,  it  is 
asserted,  that  a  ransom  will  no^  hprp^arded^  ai»d  in  the 
other,  that  a  ^^reat  ransom  connot  deliver^  and  the  con- 
ditions of  both  suppose  an  actual  (jffer;  and  in  the  case 
of  Homer's  priest  of  x\pollo,  there  was  an  actual  tender. 
Money  in  the  treasury  of  a  nation,  is  but  mere    silver 
and  gold;  but  when  offered  to  an  enemy  in  the  place  of 
captured  citizens,  then  it  becomes  a  ransom.     Ho  also  the 
humiliation  and  suffering  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  themselves 
considered,  are  but  degradation  and   misery,  but  when 
offered  in  the  place  of  man,  they  then  take  the  character 
of  a  ra«.<?r;m.    And  if  it  be  supposed  that  the  word  ransom 
implies  not  only  the  price  of  redemption  offered   in  the 
plate  of  theca|)tive,  but  also  aj^propriatel  l)y  the  offerer 
in  purpose  and  in  fact,  andacce|)ted  by  the  holder  of  the 
captive,  in  so  far  as  to  procure  some  privileges,  if  not  an 
actual  liberation:  whilst  we  would  still  contend,  that  all 
this  is  not  expressed  by  the  term  ransom;  and  from  con- 
viction ( onfifie  our  view  to  the  ideas  of  the  word  just  given; 
yet  we  freely  grant,  that  Christ  in  giving  himself  a  ran- 
som b«*came  more  to  all  than  is  literally  comprehended  in 
the  term — He  became  a  propitiation /(>r  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world.     The  wt.rd  propitiation,  simply   means, 
something  tiiat  propitiates.     Offended  Deity  is  so  far 
appeased  by  the  mediatioa  of  the  Saviour,  as  to  scatter 


his  blessings  over  the  whole  face  of  this  terrestrial  crea 
♦ion — as  to  cause  his  sun  to  shine  and  his  showers  to 
fall  upon  the  just  and  upon  the  unjust — as  to  open  all 
the  facilities  and  treasures  of  air,  earth,  and  ocean,  alike 
to  the  pious  and  the  impi!)us,  and  to  the  grateful  and  the 
thankless — and  above  all,  as  not  only  to  be  unwilling, 
that  any  should  perish,  but  so  as  to  stand  in  readiness  to 
be  eternally  reconciled  to  every  one,  however  wicked 
and  however  vile,  who  will  come  unto  him  that  he  may 
have  life. 

If  on  accou!»t  of  man's  sins,  justice  would  require,  that 
the  heavens  over  his  head  should  beconte  brai^^,  and  un- 
der his  feet  the  earth  iron,  the  sea  bear  frowns  and  terrors 
on  every  wave;  the  air.  f  he  sound  of  woe  and  the  pang  of 
torment  on  every  bn  atl.;  the  clouds  shower  curses,  and 
the  sun  dart  forked  lightikings  and  devouring  fires  over 
the  world;  and  above  all,  that  the  transgressor  should 
be  punished  with  everlasting  flestruction  from  the  pre- 
sence of  God  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power — how  can 
justice  be  maintained,  and,  yet  the  heavens  spread  over 
him  the  lofty  and  azure  conoj)y:  earth  place  her  soft  and 
verdant  carpet  under  his  feet;  the  ocean  roll  his  surges 
but  to  waft  him  to  other  shores;  the  air  continue  the  easy 
and  salubrious  element  of  life,  the  clouds  scatter  Hea- 
ven's blessings,  and  the  sun  pour  Heaven's  glories  to 
enrich  and  adorn  his  habitation,  and  more  wonderful 
than  all,  God  announcing  his  willingness  to  save  from 
the  justly  threatened  desolation,  proclaim  iu  the  inhabi- 
tants of  tl  e  world — Look  unto  me,  and  be  ye  saved,  all 
the  ends  of  the  earth—how.  unless  in  man's  stead,  some 
mediator  has  interposed,  and  so  far  sustained  the  penal- 
ties which  he  incurred  by  disobedience,  as  to  render  of- 
fended  Deity,  if  not  reconciled — yet  propitious — ready 
to  be  reconciled  to  the  whole  family  of  man?  Hpre  the 
scripture  always  its  own  best  interpreter,  whilst  it  |)ro- 
nounces  sin  the  abominable  thing  which  God  hates,  and 
its  wages  to  be  death,  casts  such  a  light  over  the  whole 
face  of  the  moral  creation,  as  reveals  the  consistency  of  his 
ways  of  clemency  to  the  whole  human  race,  l»y  teaching 
us  that  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous  is  the  propitiation  for 


78 

iJiP  sivs  of  the  whole  world,  that  he  died  for  all. and.  that 
he  hu  the  grace  of  God  tasted  dpothfor  every  man. 

Placed  williin  ihe  sphere  of  this  iihimiiiatioM,  we  ran 
discover  how  men  y  and  truth  may  meet  too:;ether — fjod 
be  just  and  yet  propitious  to  all  Adam's  rebellious  chil- 
dreo. 

It  is  no  objection,  that  in  common  langnn£;f,  a  life  Iniil 
down  in  th«^  place  of  another,  always  implies  tiie  libe- 
ration of  the  one  at  first  subject  to  deatli,  since  Christ 
by  his  mediation  has  liberated  all  matikind  from  the  im- 
mediate  endurance  of  many  of  the  suilerini^s  to  which  by 
their  apostary  they  are  leii;ally  ex[)0sed.  and  procured  for 
them  a  day  oii2;»'ace;  and  therefore  th^y  are  liberated  in  e- 
very  sense  in  which  he  died  for  their  liberation.  And  as 
his  death  is  not  only  suffic'ipnt  to  pr^jcure  this  day  of 
respite  for  all;  but  al.-JOU)  satisfy  (he  demands  of  jiHtjce 
for  their  sins,  mercy  improves  the  day,  by  making  ti- 
vertures  of  reconciliation,  putting  it  to  their  choice,  wtje- 
tticr  jiistire  shall  [)la('e  the  sulfVriuHis  of  Christ  to 
tiieir  account,  and  thus  {)rononnce  them  n'£/fp/w«^rf  and 
acquitted,  or  whether  tliey  wisl  stand  responsiMe  to 
their  own  penalties.  And  the  only  reason,  s;iven  \\\  the 
word  of  (tvuI,  why  any  perish,  is  that  they  will  }tot  conii^ 
to  Christ,  that  he  mny  become  their  surety. .and  that  his 
death  may  be  placed  to  their  accoHiit  for  justification; 
attd  thus  it  is  ^iterally  tru'j,  that  the  world  throui:;li  him 
miij;ht — because  salvation  is  left  as  fairly  to  their  choice 
j^s  any  other  offer— the  world  thron2;h  him  might  be 
saved — Imai^hie,  thatawlnde  provijjceof  a  large  empire 
should  revolt  fiom  a  powerful  king  and  that  by  the  laws 
of  the  realm,  all  the  revolutiornsts  for  their  disloyalty, 
sh(»uld!)e  subject  to  endure  a  public  execution  to-moi  row. 
J»ut  the  king's  s(m  interferes  and  says,  '^Father,  1  will  a- 
gree  to  be  exeruted  to-morrow  in  their  stead,  if  you  will 
spare  them  all  ten  days,  and  in  the  mean  time,  send  he- 
ralds among  them  to  proclaim,  that  my  death  shall  be 
ac(epted  by  you,  instead  of  th*»  death  of  every  one,  who 
within  that  time,  shall  return  to  his  allegiance."  Sup 
pose  the  proposal  accepted,  and  the  death  is  then  vicari- 
ous and  the  condemned  are  liberated  to  the  extent  of  the 


79 

stipulition.  So  in  the  case  of  Chmt's  propitinVry  ran- 
S(-m  tor  all  mankuid—they  are  actually  liberafed  fnini 
tl»e  immediale  execution  ofrnftr??/ of  the  curses  ilne  tofhem 
for  tieir  ^lisloyajty  (o  G'.d,  and  Chii^st's  (.eath  nlieietl 
to  l»e  iniputeil  to  tiiern  for  redemption  and  reconcilia- 
tion. 

It  is  not  intimated  however,  that  in  tlie  plan  of  the 
moral  system,  Christ  died  in  no  higher  spnse,  t!ian  this, 
for  ihose.  who  were  eternally  viewed  as  eventually  co- 
ntiiiH;  to  him.  re(  eivins;  spiritual  life,  and  beiiii;  actJially 
saved  through  his  death;  hut  this  view  is  2;iven,  as  tire 
most  obvious  ai.d  literal  s^nseof  such  scriptures  as  rep- 
resent  him,  dyins;  for  all.  Fora//thp  scriptures  describe 
not  his  death  as  an  atonement  or  redemption,  but  a  pro- 
pitiatiov:  throuiqli  it  Deity  is  so  propitiated,  that  he  of- 
fers to  be  rectmciled  to  o//,  and  to  make  the  haviour's 
sufferings  a  redemption  for  all. 

Thus  we  have  given  the  Arrainian,  all  the  latitude  of 
his  own  interpretation  to  his  own  favorite  scriptures,  as 
may  be  seen  from  the  following  quotation  in  Arminius' 
own  language',  as  given  by  VVitsius — "Let  us  add  to  all 
these  things  by  way  of  conclusi(  n,  the  proper  and  imme- 
diate effect  of  the  death  and  passion  of  Christ.  Now, 
it  is  not  an  actual  removal  of  sin,  from  this  or  that  parti- 
cular person,  nor  actual  remission  of  sins,  nor  justifica- 
tion,  nor  the  ar  tual  redemption  of  this  or  that  person, 
which  none  can  have  without  faith  and  the  spirit  of 
Christ;  but  the  reconciliation  of  God;  the  impetration  of 
remission,  justification,  and  redemption  before  God.'**^ 

iSow  this  amounts  to  nothing  more,  than  the  propitia- 
tion which  we  have descri!»ed,  with  the  single  exception, 
that  Arminius,  very  improperly  says — "the  reconcilia- 
tion of  God,''  For  this  there  is  no  scriptural  warrant — 
God  is  never  reconciled  to  the  sinner  uiitil  he  believes 
in  Christ.  It  is  however  evident  from  the  whole  pas- 
sage that  Arminius  meant  nothing  more  by  '-the  recou- 
ciliaiion  of  God. '^  than  we,  by  <*the  propitiating  oFCrod.'' 

These  unnumbered  bicssiugs,  that  flow  to  the  wh(de 
race  of  man  as  consequences,  from  God's   iiu-»p<'uk;J>a' 

♦ExaniirkC  Predestine,  p.  T5. 


80 

» 
gift,  at  once  clpinonstrato    his  love  to   the  whole   world, 
and  also,  that  his  love  was  the  moving  cause  in  giving 
his  Hon. 

According  to  the  order  of  the  text,  the 

II  topic  of  consideration,  is  the  design  of  God  in  gi- 
ving Ids  Son.  It  is  concisely  stated  in  the  text,  that 
whosoever  bcJieveth  on  him  shoifid  not  perish  but  have 
everlasting  life.  However  his  propitiatory  ransom 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  wnrld,  was  contempl-^ted  in 
this  (!onation;  and  however  many  less  ends  may  have 
been  revcdved  in  the  ()lan:  yet  st)  far  at  h»ast,  ms  it  relates 
to  this  world,  the  salvation  of  those  viewed  as  believing, 
loomed  highest  in  the  prospect,  and  was  the  grand  end 
in  theangnst  transaction. 

When  Deity  formed  the  great  plan  of  moral  govern- 
ment, as  the  (Jmniscient  he  had  before  him  all  actual 
and  all  possilile  beings  and  events.  In  the  important 
part  which  related  to  the  gift  of  his  Son.  he  foresaw 
with  unerring  precision,  who  of  the  human  family  would 
come  to  him,  and  thus  obtain  power  to  believe  and  be- 
come the  sons  of  God,  and  w  ho  would  not  come.  He 
therefore  foreknew,  that  a  portion  of  mankind  notwith- 
standing the  universality  of  the  propitiatory  sacrifice, 
and  all  other  moral  means,  that  his  infinite  wjsd(>m  and 
benificence,  might  provide,  would  nevertheless,  eventu- 
ally choose  the  road  to  death  and  sink  to  the  abodes  of 
endless  desolation.  Had  this  been  foreknown  as  the 
certain  choice,  and  the  cert;\in  end  of  all  Adam's  fallen 
generations,  it  would  a[)pear  unreasonable  to  conceive, 
that  Infinite  wisdom  would  still  have  given  his  Son  to 
endure  the  sufferings  of  death  and  the  inhabitation  of 
the  tomb,  to  provide  a  propitiatory  ransom  for  such  a 
race.  What  then,  but  the  redemption  of  those  who  ac- 
tually believe  could  have  been  the  great  object  of  the 
Redeemer's  mission? 

To  suppose,  that  there  ever  was  a  period  in  infinite 
duration,  in  which  Deity  had  no  plan,  by  which  he  in- 
tended to  create  and  govern  the  moral  universe;  or  in 
w  hie  h  he  hud  not  before  him  every  item  of  this  plan,  ap- 


81 

pears  like  suspecting  infinite  wisdom  of  infinite  folly it 

is  folly's  own  essence  to  be  planless;  ai,cl  U)  imagine  this 
plan  to  be  made,  and  the  events  comprehended  in  it  to 
happen  differently,  impugns  his  Omniscience,  and  is 
an  accusation  of  ignorance— it  is  a  privilege  peculiar  to  ig- 
norance  to  be  deceived.  The  All  Wise  and  the  Omnis- 
i^ient  therefore,  has  a  plan,  eternal  as  his  existence,  and 
as  infallible  as  his  wisdom,  and  if  so,  whom  he  did 
infallibly,  and  eternally, /orfZcwoze?,  as  coming  to  Christ, 
he  also  did,  \n\'?i\\\h\\  smd  etern-Aly,  prpdestinate^  to  be 
covformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son.  Moreover  whom  he 
did  predestinate^  them  he  also  called,  and  whom  he  cal- 
led, them  he  also  justified;  and  wh^m  he  justified,  them 
he  also  glorified.  And  if  after  our  reasoning,  there  still 
should  remain  a  doubt  whether  this  predestination  was 
made  in  time  or  eternity,  the  question  is  decided  by  the 
revelation,  that  God  has  chosen  believers  in  Christ,  be- 
fore the  joundatwn  of  the  world,  that  they  stiouldbfholy 
and  without  blame  before  him  in  love.  And  this  choice 
made  in  eternity,  in  purpose,  is  in  time  actually  fulfil- 
led, in  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit  and  the  bvlief  of 
the  truth.  If  therefore  they  who  believe  were  predes- 
tinated from  eternity,  and  chosen  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world,  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  God's  Son^ 
and  to  be  holy  and  without  blame  before  him  in  love;  and 
as  a  consequence  of  this  holy  transformation,  to  be.  glo- 
rified; and  if  the  Saviour  never  would  have  entered  this 
region  of  ruin,  had  he  foreseen  the  dreadful  certainty, 
that  none  would  be  saved  by  his  death,  the  conclusion 
is  irresistable,  that  in  the  purpose  of  the  infinite  mind, 
Christ's  principal  object  in  descending  to  the  pilgrimage 
of  earth,  was  to  save  them  whom  he  foresaw  as  coming 
to  him,  and  as  certainly  to  be  made,  by  his  choosing 
them,  evangelical  believers. 

Again  believers  only  are  recognised  as  actually  re- 
deemed by  Christ.  His  death  has  indeed  propitiated 
Deity  in  behalf  of  all  the  human  kind;  and  he  is  ready 
to  make  it  redemption  to  every  one  that  comes  to  the 

It 


Saviour;  yet  as  redemption  properly  signifies  a  release 
purchased  by  a  ransou),  iu  Jehovah's  eternal  and  infal- 
lible plan,  none  can  he  ranked  as  redeemed,  but  such  as 
are  foreseen  acluaily  coining  to  Christ,    that  they   may 
obtain    the  spiritual  life,  by'vvhich  they  are  enabled  to 
exercise   a  scriptural  faitli;  because  none  but  such  can 
be  released  from  the  penalties  incurred  by  transgression. 
We  indeed  read  of  wicked   men  who  deny  the  Lord, 
that  BO  UGH  V  them.     But  to  1)uy  is  not  to  redeem. — 
The  original  word  liere  accurately  translated  bought  is 
Agorazo  which  literally  signifies  to  purchase  articles  in 
the  market,  and  must  undoubtedly  apply  to  those  bought 
in  the   sense,    in    which  it   has   been   already   shown, 
Christ  died  for  the  whole  worhl      It  is  sometimes  me- 
taphorically used  in  the  sense  t^f  redeem,  and  then  it  is 
always  applied  to  believers  only.     For  thou  wast  slain 
and  hast  redeemed  US  to  God  by  thy  blood.      And  so 
also  its  co2;nate  Kxagorazo,  as  in  the  [exi— Christ  has 
redeemed  UB/rom  the  curse  of  the  law;  but  literally,  it 
can  only  mean  to  buy;'\i\i\  in  this  sense  alone,  can  it  be 
applied  to  those  that  are  eventually  lost.      Wicked  men 
bought  by  Christ's  propitiatory  ransom,  still  remain  in 
the  hands  of  viudiratory  justice,  just  as  an  article  paid 
for,  may  still  remain  in  the   iiands  of  the  seller.     But 
the  literal  meaning  of  the  Greek  word  Lutroo  properly 
translated  redeem,  signifies  to  release  a  captive  by  pay- 
ing the  price  oi  redem|)tion;  and  hence  its  derivatives 
Lutrosis  and  Jpolutrosis  denote  a  release  from  captivi- 
ty by  a  price  paid,  and   are  rightly  translated  redemp- 
tion.    According  to  the  sense  of  Agorazo,  buy,  an  ar- 
ticle may  be  purchased  and  yei  remain  in  the  t)ands  of 
the  seller;  but  in  the  original  sense  of  Lutroo,  redeem,  a 
prisoner  must  not  only  ht^ purchase dUui'diiusiWy  released. 
13iit  the  unbelievers  who  descend  to   the  pit,  is   never 
released;  and  the  idea  conveyed  in  a  scriptural  redemp- 
ti(»n,  is  oidy  applicable  to  those  released  from  condem- 
nation and  rum.      And  henf  e  the  language  nf  inspiration 
is,  The  Lord  redeemeth  the  soul  of  ids  8KIIVAN  FS. 
YE  were  not  redet^med  with  corruptible  things  as  sil- 
ver and  gold — but  wifli  the  precious  blood  of  Christ, 


83 

Who  gave  himself  for  Us,  that  he  might  redeem  V^from 
all  iyvquity.     Even  the  righteousness  of  God,  which  ts  by 
faith  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  all,  and  upon  all  that  V»K- 
LIEVE— being  justified  freely  by  his  grace  through  the 
redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  Jesus  Christ,  who  of 
God  is  made  unto  US  —redemption.    In  whom  Wl^have 
redemption  through  his  blood,  the  forgiwessof  sins.^ 
Ilavirig  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  US.     in  tthom 
W  K  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  even  the  for- 
giveness ofsins.-\     1  hus  the  Greek  u orcls  Lutroo.  Lu- 
trosis,    and    dpolutrosis,    translated    by    the   English 
words  redeem  and  redemption,  when  employed  in  rela- 
tion to   the   death  of  the  Savionr,  are  throughout  the 
iSievv  Testament  invariably  applied  to  believers  only; 
and  if  so,  we  see,   that  our  Cordession  of  Faith  exhi- 
bits the  true  meaning  of  the  Bible,  wUdn  it  declares, 
that  '^JVeither  are  any  other  redeemed  by  Chnst.X 

And  the  same  is  true  of  the  Atonement.  The  pri- 
mitive meaning  of  this  English  word,  is  to  bring  to  a- 
greement  those  that  formerly  were  at  variance — to  put 
at  one  (hose  formerly  separated  by  disagreement,  as 
may  be  seen  from  the  composition  of  the  word  at-one- 
ment.  The  original  meanings  of  the  Greek  words 
Jiatallasso  and  Katallage  of  which  our  atone  and  atone- 
ment are  translations,  are  to  change,  a  change.  When 
God  and  the  sinner,  make  peace,  a  change  is  eifected — 
they  that  were  once  at  variance,  are  now  become  friend^; 
and  this  change  is  very  properly  denominated  a  recon- 
ciliation or  an  atonement.  From  the  very  nature  of  a 
reconciliation  between  parties  once  at  variance,  their 
mutual  hostilities  must  be  followed  by  mutual  good 
will.  Now  i/  the  carnal  mi^td  is  enmity  against  God, 
however  propitious  he  may  be  towards  the  transgressor 
and  ready  to  be  reconciled  to  him;  yet  in  the  nature  of 
the  case,  there  can  be  no  atonement  between  them  un- 
til this  enmity  is  slain— until  the  man  renewed  in  the 
spirit  of  his  mind,  believes  th»*  Gospel  with  a  faith  that 
works  by  love.     And  thus  we  find,  that  while  the  Scrip- 

*Eph.  i.  7,    |Col.  i  14,    |Chap.  ui.  sec,  6. 


tures  teacb  us,  that  it  pleased  the  Father  by  him  to  re- 
concrle  all  ihin^^s  unto  himaelf,  whether  they  be  thins;$ 
in  earth,  or  things  in  heaven,  and  whilst  they  iafoim 
us,  that  this   plan   was  in  the  progress  of  fulfilment— 
that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  him- 
self, not  imputins:  their  trespasses  unto  them^  they  also 
instruct  us,  that  none,  but  ^-saints'*  and  ^'faithful  bre- 
thren",! are  actually  reconciled,  declaring  that — ''YOU, 
that  were  sometime  alienated  and  enemies  in  your  mind 
by  wicked  works;  yet  now  hath  he  reconciled."     <*lf 
when  enemies,  \VE  were   reconciled   to  God   by  the 
death  of  his  Son,  mucb  more  being  recojiciled,  we  shall 
be  saved  by  his  life."      ^*VVho  hath  reconciled  US  to 
himself  by  Jesus  Christ."     ^'And  not  only  so  but  we 
also  joy  in  God   through    our  Lord   Jesus  Christ  by 
whom  WE  have  now  received  the  atonement."     As  it 
was  the  design   of  God,    that  made    the   sufferings  of 
Christ  a  propitiatory  ransom  for  ihe  sins  of  the  whole 
world,  as  was  argued  in  the  former  part  of  this  discourse,, 
so  also  it  is  his  purpose,  that  makes  them  redemption 
and  an  atonement  to  them  that  in  coming  to  Christ  re- 
ceive  spiritual  life  to  repent  and  believe.     And  here  a 
few  extracts  from  some  well  written  letters  on  the  atone 
ment,  lately  published,  may  be  appropriately  introdu- 
ced: "It  was  the  purpose  of  God,  that  made  the  death 
of  his   Son  an  atonement;  consequently,  if  you  view 
his  death  apart  from  this  purpose,  you  can  see  no  atone- 
ment.    In  the  cross  of  Christ  thus  contemplated,  yon 
may  behold  suffering  and  ignominy;  you  may  behold  a 
display  of  fortitude  and  patience,  but  you  can  see  no  a- 
tonement.      To  discover  this,  you  must  ask  why  on  Cal- 
vary was  exhibited  that  amazing  spectacle? 

"In  Strictness  of  speech,  we  ouglit  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  death  of  Christ  and  the  atonement;  just  as  we 
distinguish  between  a  cause  and  irs  effect.  The  death 
of  Christ  is  one  thing,  antl  the  atonement  another  thing; 
the  former  being  the  cause  and  the  latter  the  effect.  In 
human  language,  it  is  not  unusual  for  the  cause  and  the 

•Sec  Romans  i.  7.  II  Cor.  i.  1.    \Co\.  i.  2, 


85 

pffect  to  receive  the  same  denomination.  Thus  the  sen- 
sation produced  and  the^rc  which  produces  it,  are  both, 
though  very  diiFerent  things,  denominated  heat.  80 
also  cold  signifies  the  cause  of  a  certain  sensation  in  the 
human  frame,  and  the  sensation  itself. 

Here  then  we  see  the  reason  why  the  death  of  Christ 
has  been  called  atonement;  it  is  so  denominated,  be- 
cause it  produces  atonement  or  reconciliation  between 
God  and  sinful  man;  and  as  it  has  produced  this  glori- 
ous effect  in  millions  of  instances;  it  is  justly  entitled  to 
this  appellation.  So  it  may  be  called  in  reference  to 
all  who  have  been,  or  shall  be,  atoned  for,  reconciled  to 
God;  but  with  what  propriety,  can  it  be  so  denominated 
in  reference  to  individuals  who  never  will  be  reconciled 
to  an  offended  God  by  its  influence?  In  truth  the  death 
of  Christ  is  an  atonement  to  no  man,  before  it  has  been 
applied,  and  produced  its  effect;  then,  and  not  till  then, 
is  it  an  atonement  to  him." 

"VV^e  have  admitted  the  merits  of  Christ's  death''  ^^to 
be  infinite  and  thatif  applied,"  thpy  "wunld  save  millions 
more  than  shall  ever  be  saved,  but  it  will  not  follow, 
that  the  atonement  was  made  for  those  who  will  never 
be  saved.  The  earth  is  large  enough  to  have  many 
millions  (jf  inhibitants  more  than  have  ever  lived  on  it, 
and  probably  to  sustain  millions  more  than  will  ever 
descend  from  Adam;  but  on  this  account,  it  cannot  with 
any  propriety  be  said,  that  it  was  made  for  human  be- 
ings, who  shall  never  be  created.  The  Sun  is  large 
and  luminous  enough  to  send  his  beams  to  more  pla- 
nets than  exist  in  the  solar  system  and  to  enlighten  and 
warm  their  inhabitants;  but  on  account  of  his  greatness 
and  grandeur,  it  could  not  be  said  witli  any  propriety 
that  he  was  formed  to  enlighten  and  warm  inhabitants 
of  planets,  that  shall  never  be  created."* 

And  we  not  only  argue  the  design  of  Christ's  advent 
from  facts,  that  in  the  purpose  of  God.  his  death  is  made 
redemption  and  atonement  to  those  only,  that  believe 
but  from  the  language  of  the  scriptures  which  proclaim 

*Janeway*«  letters  on  the  Atonement* 


86 

that  desi2;n:  *»VVIio  gave  himself  for  iis,  that  be  mii^ht 
redeem  ITS  from  ali  iniquity  and  purify  unto  himself  a 
peculiar  people,  z^^alous  of  i^ood  works.''  "For  Christ 
also  hath  once  suffered  for  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust, 
that  he  might  bring  US  to  irod."  '•For  him  who 
knew  no  sin,  he  hath  ma  le  to  be  sin  for  us,  that  WE 
might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him." 
'^^Rut  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come,  God  sent  his 
8(m — t5iat  he  might  redeem  them  that  are  under  the  law, 
that  VV^E  might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons"  "Who 
died  for  us,  that  w  hether  we  wake  or  sleep  WE  should 
live  togeUier  with  him."  *^Who  his  own  self  bare  our 
sins — that  WE  being  dead  to  sin,  should  live  unto 
righteousness."  "Christ  also  loved  the  CllUKCH, 
and  gave  himself  for  it;  that  he  might  sanctify  it;  and 
cleanse  it  wUh  the  wasldng  of  water  by  the  word;  that 
he  might  present  it  to  himself  a  glorious  church  not  ha- 
ving spot,  nor  wrinkle;  nor  any  such  thing;  but  that  it 
should  be  holy  and  without  blemish." 

'I'hus  the  purpose  of  God,  in  relation  to  the  Saviour's 
madiation,  is  definitely  stated  in  the  language  of  inspi* 
ration,  to  be  the  salvation  of  them  that  believe,  from  sin 
a^id  of  course  from  its  coi^sequent  miseries. 

Then  if  the  process  of  investigation,  pursued  in  this 
discourse,  exhibit  the  true  sense  of  itispiration,  we  are 
divinely  taught,  tl»at  God  loved  the  whole  world,  and 
consequently,  desired  all  men  to  be  saved;  yet  in  design 
gave  his  Son  to  make  redentption,  and  atonement,  and 
to  procure  salvation  for  none  but  those  who  eventually 
believe.  The  former  are  views  peculiarly  Arminian, 
and  the  latter  p<^cnliarly  Calvinistic.  Hpre  the  strenu- 
ous Amdnian  and  the  hightoned  Calvirdst  rush  in  on 
each  side  from  their  opposite  [)olt's,  and  declare  these 
views  irreconcileable  with  each  other.  Our  reply  is, 
that  a  literal  course  of  Biblical  exposition,  has  produ- 
ced these  resiilts,  and  if  you  pronounce  them  irreconci- 
leable with  each  other,  you  openly  declare,  that  the 
Bible  on  these  to[)ics  literally  contradicts  itself,  and  you 
both  tacitly  acknowled.:;'%  that  yimr  systems  can  not  be 
defended;  but  by  a  ligurativc  interpretation  of  sacred 


87 

writ;  ami  ene  of  you  says,  that  one  set  of  Scriptures 
must  be  converted  into  figure,  and  the  other  a  class  just 
the  opposite.  Bt  fore  however  adopting  the  advice  of  ei- 
ther, let  us  examine  vvhetlier  these  Scriptures  are  in- 
deed literally  contradictory.  On  the  one  hand  we  are 
taught,  that  God  loved  the  whole  world;  and  on  the  o- 
ther,  that  his  design  was  to  send  his  only  bt-gotten  8oa 
^o  save  them  only  that  believe.  Wherein  is  the  dis- 
crepance? God's  benevolence  is  as  boundless  as  his  in- 
finite nature,  and  therefore  he  uill  have  all  men  to  he 
saved.  But  with  all  the  means  which  a  gracious  God 
employs,  a  great  portion  of  men,  will  not  come  to  Christ, 
that  they  might  have  spiritual  life  to  become  scriptural 
believers;  it  is  inconsistent  with  his  juslice  and  other 
perfections  to  grant  them  spiritual  life  and  salvation 
without  such  coming.  In  forming  his  eternal  plan  of 
moral  government,  as  the  Omniscient  he  had  before  him 
all,  tiiat  would,,  and  all  that  would  not  come  to  obtain 
life,  so  as  to  be  made  true  believers.  Then  as  a  Wise 
and  Omniscient  God,  who  would  not  be  planless,  nor 
yet  form  a  false  plan,  he  \V(^uld  frame  a  j)arpose,  not  as 
extensive  as  his  benevolence,  but  according  to  the  known 
certainties  of  that  natural  liberty,  which  is  an  essential 
to  a  moral  system — a  purpose  coincident  with  the  cer- 
tainty of  the  number  of  those  who  w  ould  come  to  Cinist.^^ 
Had  he  formed  a  purpose  to  send  Christ  to  save  those 
who,  he  knew  ivould  not  be  saved^  he  would  have  exhi- 
bited the  absurdity  of  choosing  his  own  deception,  and 
then  in  contradictiou  to  his  own  word  i^e  would  have 
displayed  in  fact  to  the  universe,  that  "the  purpose  of 
God  slialV^  KOr  ^'stand,  and  that  he  icilP' ^0  1  '^imr- 
form  all  Ms  pleasure.'''  Ho  that  on  the  one  side,  we 
are  taught  his  infinite  good  will,  and  on  the  (»ther.  Ids 
infinite  wisdom;  and  who  but  an  atheist  should  pro- 
nounce these  periectinns  irreconcileable  with  each  other? 
Nor  is  there  any  discrepance  between  the  views 
which  the  Arminian'nnd  Calvinistic  texts  exhil>it  in  re- 
lation to  the  death  of  Christ.     Why  might  not  Deity,  in 

*See  No.  Ill,  pp,  .5'5,  56,  57,  58,  59;  Stc.  Also  No.  I.  pp.  11,  13  Ac 


88 

his  eternal  purpose,  determiiir^  that  Chtist's  deatli 
should  at  once  be  SLj^ropitiathn  tor  the  sins  of  the  whole 
worhl,  and  also  a  redemption  and  an  atovement  ^in 
thcni  only,  thai  eventually  !>elieve;  as  ^^eU  as  decree, 
that  the  moon  should  at  once  be  a  reflector  to  cast  her 
pale  rays  over  the  darkness  of  this  world,  and  also,  be 
an  abode  of  life  and  happiness  to  numerous  intellec- 
tual inhabitants,  or,  that  the  «un  b^'  his  heat  and 
his  light  should  be  the  occasion,  at  once,  of  both  sun- 
shine  and  showersP  In  the  nature  of  the  case  there  is 
nothing  unreasonable  in  supposing,  that  the  Saviour's 
death  should  be  aj)pointed  for  one  purpose  to  all  and 
for  anotlier  to  those  who  believe.  And  the  Scriptures 
which  teach  a  propitiation  \\\v  all  and  an  atojiempnt  and 
redemption  for  those  only  who  believp^  are  crowned  with 
all  the  evidence  of  actual  facts.  Is  it  not  true,  that  none 
but  believers,  are  actuMlly  redeemed — released  from  the 
tyranny  of  sin  and  punishjinnit,  and  actually  reconciled 
to  God?  And  is  it  not  true,  that  the  whole  world  is  un- 
der a  dispensation  of  God's  clen^ency,  or  why  is  not 
every  fallen  descendant  of  Adam  consigned  to  the  fiery 
pit  as  soon  as  he  commits  his  tirst  sin?  Without  some 
propitiation  to  appease  offended  Deity,  this,  stern  justice 
would  inevitably  demand. 

Some  Calvinists  will  probably  ask,  for  what  purpose 
did  Christ  become  a  propitiatory  ransom  for  the  whole 
world?  Since  all  will  not  be  saved  what  necessity  for 
such  a  ransom? — In  the  economy  of  God,  the  wicked 
and  the  righteous  must  in  this  world,  stand  together, 
like  the  wheat  and  the  tares. 

The  servants  were  not  permitted  to  gather  the  tares, 
lest  they  should  root  up  the  wheat  als(»:  so,  as  the  wic- 
ked and  the  righteous  are  connected  together  in  all 
brotherhoods  of  lite;  and  as  progenitors  and  posterity; 
and  as  many  noija  wicked  are  yet  to  become  righteous; 
the  swift  ministers  of  justice,  must  not  immediately  de- 
scend to  gather  the  impenitent  for  their  burnings;  lest 
with  the  wicked,  the  righteous  also  be  rooted  from  the 
earth,  liut  the  claims  of  justice  are  inexorable  and  de- 
iutind  immediate  sati^sfaction;  and  hence,  that   God  may 


89 

gather  a  church  from  the  ruins  of  the  fall,  and  snp^ 
poM  the  justice  of  his  throne,  results  the  necessity  of  a 
Mediator  and  a  propitiation  for  alL  A  just  Jehovah 
must  be  propitiated,  that  ever^  transgressor  be  not 
sunk  instantly  to  hell. 

Besides  it  is  agreeable  to  Him  who  delights  not  in 
iniquity,  that  the  moral  universe  should  be  governed  ia 
the  way,  best  adapted  to  prevent  sin,  and  promote  righ- 
teousness; and  this  in  moral  beings — beings  endowed 
with  natural  liberty,  is  effected  by  presenting  to  them 
the  strongest  possible  motives  to  obedience.  JBut  what 
motives  so  strong,  can  be  presented  to  such  beings,  as 
the  proof  of  God's  love  given  in  Christ's  becoming  for 
them  a  propitiation;  his  willingness,  that  his  sufferings 
should  be  an  atonement  and  redemption  to  all  who  will 
come  to  him;  and  his  desire,  that  all  should  come? — 
Here  are, 

^'Amazing  pity,  grace  unknown. 
And  love  beyond  degree" — 

These  motives  having  been  presented,  in  the  day  oC 
jiul2;ment  not  only  shall  all  the  world  become  guilty 
before  God,  but  every  mouth  shall  be  stopt  and  every 
tongue  become  speechless;  and  sullen  silence,  shall  ac- 
knowledge, that  the  only  reason  why  all  were  not  sa- 
ved, is  because  tijey  would  not, — The  Saviour  would 
have  gathered  them,  but  they  would  mot. 

If  the  Arminian  object,  that  God's  determining 
Christ's  death  to  be  redemption  and  an  atonement  for 
those  only  whom  coeternally  with  his  determination,  h© 
foreknew  as  coming  to  the  feaviour,  would  be  unjustAn- 
asmuch  as  it  would  be  leaving  others  out  ui'  the  plan  of 
salvation,  not  for  any  thing,  which  they  had  aciually 
done,  but  for  something  which  he  foresaw  they  would 
do,  wc  reply,  that  an  objection  of  precisely  the  same 
form,  may  be  urged  witlj  as  much  cogenry  against  his 
own  system.  He  supposes,  that  God  fn^m  eternity, 
foreknew  the  particular  individuals  of  the  ho  man  race, 
that  in  the  neglect  of  his  mercies^  would  die  in  unbelief. 


90 

ami,  that  fur  this  uiibfiienbieseen,  he  tVom  eternity  de- 
teruiined    t«»    inflict  od    theni,   everlasting   punishment. 
^Ovv  lare  he  admits  an  elernal    delerminalion   to  inflict 
KKiless  niisery,  not  for  sins  acluiilly  toinmitled,  hut  for 
sins  foreseen    to   be    conimittc d.      If  then,    our   system 
make  Ueity  uujust,  as  he  iniai;ines,  because  it  supposes 
that  for  their  sins  foreseen,  bui  not  yet  coininitred,  in  his 
plan  he  left  them  out  of  the  number  of  tiiose  for   whom 
he  determined  Christ's  death   to  be  redemption  and  an 
atonement;  as  much  at  least  does  the  Arminiati  system 
make  him  unjust,  since    it  sn[)poses,  that  for   sins  fore- 
seen, hut  not  yet  perpetrated,  he  determined  from  eter- 
nity, to  consign  the  unbelievins;  to  the  deeps  of  a  fiery  and 
an  endless  desolation.     Every   sensible  Arminian  will 
immediately  perceive,  that  in  making  this  objection,  he 
furnishes  a  sword  which  will  as  readily  decapitate  him- 
self, as  wound  his  antagonist.     And  if  in  the  scriptural 
idea  of  a  propitiation,  wecompreliend  all  th.it  he,  with- 
out any  warrant  from  the  Bible,  denominates  '^an  atone- 
ment or   redem[)tion,"    then  we  in   reality  admit,   that 
Christ   did  as    much  for  the   salvation   of  all  men    as 
he  supposes- -lit   became    a   proj)itiation    fur   the  sins 
of  the    whole    world;    on  the   basis   this  propitiation, 
his  death  is  offered  to  be  made  to  all  the  ground  of  re- 
demption and  of  an  attniement;  God    sincerely    desires 
that  all  should  ccmie,  that  it  thus  might  be  made  to  tht  m, 
reconciliation  and  redemption:    nothing   prevents   tneir 
coming,  but  an  excuseless  ^^wtll  noty^  and  to  overcome 
even  this,  he  employs   every  means  consistent  with    a 
moral  Governor:   but  we  contend  also,  that  as  his  pur- 
poses descend  to  all  the  [»articular  events  of  his   moral 
kingdom,  he  eternally  decreed,  that  the  Saviour's  8uf< 
ferings  should  procure  an  actual  redemption,  and  an  ac- 
tual atonement,  for  all  such,  as  he  coeternally  foresaw, 
would,  in  the  scri[)tural  sense  of  the  word,  come  to  him; 
and,  that  he  did  notdelermine  it  to  be  such  for  any  others, 
lint  it  is  asked,  'nvhat  if  others  should  c(»me?''    As  this 
is  a  supposition  contrary  to  certainty  and  fact,  it  is  fair  to 
answer  it  with  another  supposition  of  the  same  character, 
AVe  suppose,  that  if  this  were  the  case,  God  w  ould  have 


9t 

foreknown  the  event;  and  as  there  is  an  ae^reement  be- 
tween his  foreknowle(l£;e  and  his  decrees,  he  would  have 
determined  the  application  of  Christ's  death  as  an  atone- 
ment, to  be  commensurate    with  this  supposed  greater 
number.    The  Arminian  imagines  however,  that  if  God's 
determinations  reach  every  event  in  the   universe,  then 
he  becomes  the  author  of  sin.     Eut  if  it  be  true,  that  his 
foreknowledge  of  the  choosingsof  his  moral  cieatiim,  be 
coeval  with  his  plan,  the  inference  is  illegitimate,  be- 
cause in  relation  to  his  prescience    his   decrees  can  not 
l)e  caiisaL    A  cause  must  always  precede  the  fffcct  in  the 
order  of  duration.      J5ut  his  decrpps  are  coevat  with  his 
jjrpscience;  they  cannot  then  fnie  be  the  cause  of  the  di- 
vine foreknowldge:    and  if  not  of  that  foreknowiedge, 
not    of  the   things   foreknown.     The    agency  that  pro- 
duces events,  is  the  cause  of  thoj^e  events.     But  the  de- 
termination of  an  event  is  one  tiiirjg,  and  the  agent  that 
produces  it,  another;  the  decree  therefore,  of  winch  an  e- 
viiiit  is  the  fulfilment,  cannot  be  the  cause  of  that  event. 
The  event  therefore,  may  he   produced  by  an  agent  en- 
tirely different  from  the  one  who   decrees.     God's  de- 
crees therefore  may  be  fulfilled   by  the  agency  of  others 
as  well  as  by  his  own,  and  either   his  own   agency,   or 
this  agency  of  others,  and    not  his  decrees,  is  the  cause 
of  the  events  decreed — God  deterniued   to   create   the 
world;  in  fulftlment  of  this  determination  he  created   it 
— himself  Sind  not  his  dpcree^  was  the  cause  of  the  pro- 
duction; God  determined  to  give  up  the  heathen  world 
to  vile  affections,'^  to  idolatry,  and  to  all  the  wickedness 
which  he  knew  they  would  choose,   and  thus   determi- 
ned to  suffer  all  these  enormous  sins — iJiemselvPS  how- 
ever and  not  God  s  decree  to  suffer  them,  was  the  cause 
of  these  enormities.    So,  that  the  coeternity  of  the  divine 
foreknowledge  and  of  the   divine    decrees,    levels  the 
imaginary  mountain  at  a  single  stroke;  and  casts  to  the 
winds  the  old   Arminian  objection,  that   the  doctrine  of 
predestination  destroys  man's  natural  liberty. 
In  this  subject  we  have  the  goodness  and  the  wisdom  of 

*Rom.  i.  26. 


God  equally  displayed.  In  his  goodness  so  strong  are  his 
well  wishes  for  the  happiness  even  of  the  wicked,  that 
he  lov«^d  the  world:  in  infinite  wisdom,  he  adopted  a 
covenant  of  meroy.  ordered  in  all  thin£;s  and  sure,  and 
gave  his  Son  to  become  a  propitiation  for  all,  and  an  a- 
tonins;  and  redeeming  sacrifice  for  thena  that  believe. 
Let  saints  adore  and  obey,  and  let  sinners  believe  and 
shed  tears  of  penitence  at  the  love  and  the  humiliation 
proclaimed  by  the  cross. 

And  if  these  things  be  so,  let  no  messenger  of  Jesus, 
fear,  that  he  is  transcending  the  limits  of  scriptural  or- 
thodoxy, or  any  article  of  the  Presbyterian  church, 
when  he  infcu'ms  dying  men,  however  thoughtless,  or 
however  wretched,  that  with  the  love  of  benevolence. 
God  loves  thetrin  and  Christ  died  for  tJiPm^  and  that  if 
they  are  not  saved  it  is  because  they  will  not. 


UEMAHES, 

VVe  beg  leave  of  our  re:vders,  to  introduco  a  few  le- 
tnarks  on  some  strictures,  on  our  first  number,  over  the 
signature  '•Arminiau'',  w  hich  recently  appeared  in  ihe 
^^Rpligious  Messengvr  of  the  Philadelphia  Conference,'' 
a  Methodist  weekly  paper,  published  in  Philadelphia. 
In  our  remarks  we  intend  no  atlack  upon  the  society  lo 
which  the  writer  probably  belongs. — We  recognise  ma- 
ny among  them,  both  clergy  and  laity,  as  friends  and 
christian  brethren,  svith  whom  we  have  held  commu- 
nion, and  taken  sweet  counsel  together,  and  whom, 
whilst  we  wish  them  better  reconciled  to  pure  Bible  or- 
thodoxy, we  love,  and  fron)  ubiun,  we  wtuild  not  wish, 
our  diiiVrence  of  theological  opinions,  to  alienate  our 
sillections.  But  our  duty  to  the  great  JShepherd,  some- 
times requires  us  to  mark  a  black  slieep  in  whatever 
fold  he  may  be  found. 

We  think,  the  literary,  theological,  and  moral  quali- 
fications of  the  writer  not  such  as  prepare  him.  either 
for  Biblical  ( titirism  or  thecdogical  animadversions  As 
we  have  neither  the  name,  uor  any  personal  knowledgie 


93 

of  the  author,  our  c^ecision  is  made  entirely  from  his 
Strictures.     We  exaiiufic  first  his  literary  abilities: 

We  make  no  remarks  on  tyjjogra})hical  errors,  to 
which  every  publisher  is  exposed;  nor  are  we  oflended, 
because  he  tells  us  that  ^»he  has  completely  failed  in  his 
main  design  as,  1  think,  evrry  attempt  of  the  kind  must 
do;'"  [Stric.  No.  l]  or  because  he  says  **all  things  else 
as  zV  [aie]  »'casual;"  [Stric  No.  4]  or  because  with 
some  considerable  degree  of  bad  taste,  he  makes  the 
Greenlander  quake  and  fear  like  a  man,  and  at  the 
same  time  howl  like  a  dog  f^tric  No,  :].  'I  hese  are 
trifles,  on  account  of  whicii  we  would  not  be  disposed 
to  condemn  the  performance  in  foio,  as  destitute  of 
claims  to  literary  tolerance,  if  not  to  literary  appr<'l>a- 
tion.  But  when  a  man  })laces  himself  before  the  world 
in  the  attitude  of  a  public  expounder  of  divine  truth, 
and  as  a  theol(»giral  cesisor,  and  then,  in  addition  t(j 
these  minor  blemishes  of  composition,  proves  himself 
not  only  utterly  ignorant  of  Ciblical  criticisuj;  but  to  be 
so  uncultivated  in  his  vernacular  tonguf*,  as  to  write  and 
publish  language,  which  conveys  ideas  altogether  dif- 
ferent from  those  irKended  to  be  exhibited,  we  then 
think,  that  the  dignity,  and  hcmor  of  religion,  demand, 
that  such  a  man,  should  be  at  least,  informed  of  his  de- 
ficiencies: 

Id  strictures  H^o.  4]  we  are  2;ravely  informed  by  our 
censor,  that,  ''trom  the  f(>undation  of  the  world"  does 
not  literally  mean  from  all  eternity.  Now  if  he  had 
been  so  fortunate,  as  to  have  turned  to  his  Greek  Tes- 
tament; or  if  he  does  not  read  Greek,  as  it  would  rather 
seem,  if  he  had  opened  R.  Watson's  book,  which  he 
has  several  times  very  unappositely  introduced  into  his 
strictures,  at  the  beginning  of  his  chapter  on  the  Om- 
niscience of  Deity,  he  would  there  have  found  it  rightly 
translated  "'From  all  eternity;''''  and  if  this  would  not 
have  done,  if  he  had  gone  to  Aristotle.  [De  Coelo  Lib. 
I,  Cap,  9]  whose  authority,  as  a  Greek  schidar,  is  still 
better,  he  would  have  seen  the  decision  confirmed;  and 
the  good  sense  of  the  theological  community  would  then 


91 

probably,  not  have  been  offended  witb  the  illiterate  bab- 
bling, that  the  text  does  not  inean/rom  all  eternity. 

In  strictures  No.  3,  we  meet  with  a  similar  instance 
of  ipse  dixit  exposition.     There  our  censor,  very  con- 
fidently, as  if  well  acquainted  with  the  whole  matter, 
declares   ^'1  am  liappy  in    having  the  authority  of  the 
Apostle  Paul,  to  bear  me  out  in  this  view  of  the  subjecl. 
His  words  are,  God  hath  from  the  be^s;inning  chosen  i/ou 
to  Salvation  'rHiiv)UGIl  the  sanctification  of  the  Spi- 
rit and  the  belief  of  the  tritth:'^  and  then  with  an   air  of 
supreme  confidence,  he  draws  the  conclusion,  that  the 
sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  belief  of  the  truth, 
are  in  the  text,  anterior  to  the  choice  of  (xod.     Had  he 
here  consulted  the  very  words  of  tlie  Holy  Ghost,  he 
would  have  found,  that  the  apostle  Paul,    who  is  not 
genernlly  suspected  of  Anninianism,  is  in  this  text,  pe- 
culiiirly  adverse  to  the  system;  that  tlie  through  so  con- 
fid<*ntly  dwelt  upon,  is  the  Greek  en  [most  strictly  and 
literally  in'];  and,  tiiat  consequeiitiy,  the  Saints  here  ad- 
dressed, were  chosen,  in  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit 
and  the  belief  of  the  truth.     'J^hus  God  carries  into  ef- 
fiM't  his  eternally  desii^ned  clioice,  beginning  in  the  sanc- 
tification of  the  Spirit,  by  whicli  the  moral  power  to  ex- 
ercise faith  is  given;  and  ending  in  the  believing  opera- 
tion of  that  power.     '1  he  original  language  of  this  text 
is  most  decisive  against  the  Arminian  notion,  that  God 
chooses  men  to  be  saints  after  he  sees  they  are  saints. 

But  in  stricture  4,  he  proves  himself  inadequate  toihe 
appropriate  application  of  even  English  words.  VVe  are 
there  informed,  that  the  determinations  of  Heity,  are  ca- 
sual In  first  glancing  the  e.ve  over  the  sentence  it  was 
supposed  to  be  a  typographical  error,  and  of  course, 
its  place  was  supplied  with  causal.  15ut  to  our  sur- 
])rise,  wefoujid  the  word  repeated,  and  repeated,  some- 
times very  much  to  the  annoyance  of  li.  Watson's  good 
sense.  'I  his  proved  at  once,  that  our  confident  critic, 
Jiad  never  rooted  up  all  the  classic  soil  of  Greece  and 
Home,  nor  yet  swr.llowed  Johnson's  Dictionary  whole. 
In  the  annals  of  theological  lore  we  know  of  no  better 
parallel,  than  the  following  auccdotC;,  communicated  Lv 


a  gentleman  of  respectability  as  a  fact:  A  certain  prea- 
cher chose  for  his  text,  the  reply  of  the  slothful  servant 
to  his  Lord;  **1  feared,  because  thou  art  an  austere 
man,"  and  not  thoroughly  versed  in  Dictionary  distinc- 
tions, he  read  -'thou  art  an  oyster  wan.^^  He  then  pro- 
ceeded to  show,  how  God  resembled  an  oyster  man;  he, 
described  the  various  ways  of  rakins;  oysters;  traced 
the  analogy  between  them  and  the  methods,  in  which 
Grod  rakes  for  sinners;  and  eventually,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected, succeeded  in  convincing  the  more  intelligent 
part  of  his  au<lience,  that  he  was  better  qualified  for  ra- 
king ojsters,  than  for  preaching  the  Gospel.  When  such 
men  are  paraded  befoie  the  public,  as  teachers  of  religion 
and  the  defenders  of  theological  systems,  we  have  a  pic- 
ture  so  ludicrous,  as  warrants  us  in  adopting  the  language 
of  the  poet — 

Sp f datum  admissi  risum  teneatis,  amiciP 
and  yet,  when  viewed  in  another  aspect,  it   is  such  as 
ought  to  make  every  lover  of  Zioo's   health  and  pros- 
perity mourn. 

We  secondly  consider  his  acquaintance  with  theologi- 
cal opinions  incompetent.  W  e  pass  over  any  particular 
exposure  of  the  want  of  that  mental  training,  by  which 
a  man  is  enabled  to  direct  all  his  words  to  a  point — a 
want,  however,  very  loudly  proclaimed  in  these  stric- 
tures, by  a  frequent  wandering  from  the  subject  at  first 
proposed,  and  by  the  unappropriate  expressions,  and 
the  irrelevant  matter  often  introduced. 

in  stricture  No.  J,  he  proves  the  narrowness  of  his 
Theological  reading  when  he  charges  the  Christian 
Preacher,  with  a  misrepresentation,  because  it  is  stated 
that  Calvin  places  the  determinations  of  God  before  his 
foreknowledge.-^In  proof  of  this,  see  the  quotation  from 
Calvin's  Institutes,  at  the  end  of  the  third  page  of 
Christian  Preacher  No,  1,  and  also  the  follow] nic  quo- 
tation from  his  institutes — Hook  111.  Chap.  XXill, 
Sec.  1 — *'The  cause  of  liardening  is  the  sf'cret  counsel 
of  God;'^  and  if  the  cause  of  hardening,  then  antece- 
dent to  the  foreknowledge  of  hardening;  because  an  c- 
vent,  according  to  the  reasoning  of  Calvinists,  can  not 
be  known,  as  certain,  until  its  certainty  is  secured.    To 


96 

this   we  add    the    following   anthovities  of  €alvini&tic 
writers: 

**All  the  forpknowlfMl£;e  of  fulnre  things,  is  founded 
on  the  decree  of  God." — Wifsius  on  Cov.  vol.  it,  p,  9. 

**Frescience  follows — j)rede:^tin?ition''  Back's  Theo^ 
Die.  under  the  word  JWesciencp, 

**Praescientia  Dei  seqiiitor  ejus  decretnni.  The  pre- 
science of  God  follows  his  decree. — Francis  Turrettin 
Vol.  i,  p,  331. 

The  latter  author  was  one  of  the  successors,  that 
occupied  Calvin's  chair  at  G(Micva.  It  would  be 
well  if  certain  preachers  and  writers,  who  are  frequent- 
ly refuting  and  abusing  Calvin,  would  first,  be  at  the 
trouble  of  learning  what  Calvinism  is.  It  would  no 
doubt  save  them  a  great  amount  of  labour.  We  think  the 
above  quotations  suflBcient  to  render  palpable  the  igno- 
rance of  our  censor. 

We  thirdly  consider  h]^  regnrd  to  cand<vnr,  and  truth 
as  much  deficient  as  eitiu  i'  his  literary  or  tInMjIogical  at- 
tainments. In  stricture  No.  ;i,  tht*  Christian  Preacher 
is  represented  in  the  most  unqurilifu'd  manner,  as  tea- 
chins;,  that  Christ  did  not  die  Uw  ail  mankind.  I'his 
statement  is  not  only /h/.s£^,  but.  if  the  writer  read  the 
i7th  page  of  the  No.  he  prnlV'ssed  to  review  he  must 
have  known  it  to  h^ false.  It  appears  like  a  downwright 
intentional  misrepresentati^m — ^ee  Christian  Preacher 
No.  i.  p.  27,  and  No.  iv.  throuirhout.  At  the  end  of  stric- 
ture No.  i.  we  are  informed,  that  it  will  be,  as  difficult  to 
gain  submission  to  Calvinism  in  any  finm,  among  ♦he 
Arminian  part  of  tht*  population  of  Delaware  as  it 
^"would  to  persuade  them,  that  Judas  died  for  the  world 
instead  of  Jrsus  Christ;  or  that  the  Bibalonish  captivi- 
ty was  iieforc  the  flood" — This  may  all  be  true.  But 
in  this  sentence  a  piece  of  scandal  shows  as  much  of  its 
face  as  it  dare. 

/The  vcmarls  irtll  he  concluded  in  the  next  number. ) 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER. 


Vol.  1.  OCTOBER,  18^7- No.  5. 

THE  GOVEliJrMEJtTT  OF  GOD. 

The  Lord  reigneth;  let  the  earth  rejoice;  let  the  multitude  of  the 
isles  be  glad  thereof— Ps,  xcvii.  1 . 

All  nature  is  silent,  yet  in  distinct  and  harmonious 
language,  acknowledges  the  necessity  of  a  supreme  go- 
verning power.  When  we  see  the  earth  moved  with 
convulisious;  seas  rolling  their  waves  over  the  abodes 
of  men;  and  volcanos  burying  in  ruins  the  cities,  scat- 
tered on  the  surrounding  plains,  and,  above  all,  when 
we  see  lawless  multitudes,  raising  the  voice  of  anarchy, 
like  the  roaring  of  many  waters;  and  unruly  nations,  rush- 
ing like  planets  hurled  headlong  from  their  orbits,  thwar- 
ting each  others  paths,  and  dashing  each  other  in  pieces — 
WQfeel  that  a  power  Omnipotent,  to  balance  the  rocking 
world,  to  bound  the  raging  sea,  to  stay  the  fury  of  the  bur- 
ning sepulchres,  to  allay  the  whirlwind  of  clashing  anar- 
chy, and  quell  the  storm  of  angry  nations,  is  not  only  re- 
quisite, but  indispensible  to  the  order  of  the  world.  With- 
out the  assurance  of  such  a  power,  what  a  sad  spectacle 
would  creation  often  present!  Such  a  power  the  text 
reveals.     In  this  discourse  we  shall, 

I.  Consider  the  Government  of  God;  and 

II.  Why  it  should  be  the  cause  of  joy. 
1.  The  Government  of  God — 

1.  He  rules  in  the  natural  world.  He  directs  the 
wanderings  of  every  atom,  and  guides  the  revohitions  of 
every  planet.  W  ithout  his  direction,  not  a  sparrow 
falls  to  the  ground;  every  hair  is  numbered;  the  heaven 
is  the  work  of  his  fingers,  and  he  ordained  the  moon 
and  the  stars. 

One  part  of  the  work  of  creation,  was  the  arrange- 
ment of  matter  into  forms.  In  creating  the  world,  God 
made  the  waters  retire,  and  the  dry  land  appear.  He 
organized  matter  into  herbs,  and  trees  and  beasts,  and 
men,     A  similar  translation  of  matter,  and  organization 


98 

of  it  into  forms,  have  ever  since  been  in  process  up  to 
tlie  present  moment.  Vegetable  substances  are  conver- 
ted into  animal  bodies,  and  animal  into  vegetable. —  Ihe 
corn  eaten  by  the  ox,  is  converted  into  a  part  of  his  bo- 
dy; he  dies;  his  flesh  is  dissolved  on  the  field,  and  is  a- 
gain  transmuted  into  corn.  Again  the  matter  that  com- 
poses a  man's  body  at  sixfy  years  of  age,  is  not  thft 
same,  that  constitutes  it  at  twenty.  The  original  par- 
ticles have  been  expelled  and  new  ones  introduced. 
As  soon  as  this  flux  of  matter  ceases,  the  man  dies. 
The  process  then,  that  preserves  life,  is  a  constant  work 
of  creation.  'I'he  same  is  demostrably  true  of  the  ve- 
getable generations. 

In  the  work  of  creation,  the  waters  were  separated 
from  the  waters — the  waters  above  the  firmament  from 
those  below— and  formed  into  clouds  above,  and  into 
seas  below.  This  creation  of  watery  forms,  we  still 
constantly  witness.  Water  is  taken  up  into  the  atmos- 
phere and  converted  into  vapours  and  clouds,  and  a- 
gain,  in  the  form  of  rains,  dews,  frosts,  or  snows,  it  de- 
scends and  is  conveyed  by  a  thousand  channels  into  the 
Ocean  whence  it  was  taken.  Thus  the  deep  is  made 
the  store  house  to  receive  the  watery  atoms,  and  to  give 
forth  others  to  undergo  the  same  varied  transforma- 
lions. 

And  if  we  descend  to  the  bowels  of  the  earth,  in  the 
mineral  kingdom,  we  find  the  same  evidence  of  a  con- 
stant creative  process — rocks  dissolving  to  dust,  and 
dust  changing  to  rocks. 

Thus  the  same  operations,  that  in  the  Bible,  are  as- 
cribed to  God  at  first,  as  a  work  of  creation,  have  beea 
moving  onwards,  through  all  successive  years.  And 
if  this  process  at  first  required  the  exercise  of  Almighty 
power,  why  should  not  the  same  process  still  denand 
the  exertion  of  the  same  energies?  And  if  so,  God  rules 
matter  in  all  the  variety  of  its  kingdom,  in  its  minutest 
particles,  lint  if  in  its  minute  atoms,  shall  we  say, 
that  he  does  not  in  its  congregated  and  more  magnified 
fori:  ^^?  Shall  we  say,  that  hp  rules  tbe  particles  of  ve- 
getable matter,  until  he  forms  a  plant,  and  then  lets  loose 


99 

his  grasp?— That  he  conducts  the  movements  of  atoms, 
until  he  forms  rocks  and  mountains,  beasts  and  men, 
clouds  and  oceans,  and  then  surrenders  their  magnifi- 
cence to  the  wihl  vagaries  of  chance?  Shall  v^e  say,  that 
he  conducts  atoms,  but  lets  worlds  fall  from  his  hand  as 
if  too  ponderous  for  his  omnipotence? 

But  it  is  thought  by  some,  that  to  suppose,  when  De- 
ity first  created  matter,  he  impressed  upon  it  certain 
laws,  by  which  it  produces  its  mutations,  and  propa- 
gates its  own  forms,  without  the  superintendence  of  any 
Sovereign  power,  presents  more  exalted  notions  of  his 
efficiency  and  his  wisdom.  In  answer  to  this,  it  ought 
to  be  sufficjent  to  repeat  the  argument,  that  all  these 
transformations  of  matter,  in  the  first  instance,  are  by 
the  Scriptures,  attributed  to  the  immediate  ngency  of 
Deity;  and  if  so,  atoms  at  first  liad  received  none  of 
those  laws  of  transformation  of  wliich  philosophers  now 
so  frequently  speak;  because,  the  divijie  interposition 
described,  would  then  have  been  unnecessary.  And  if 
no  such  laws  existed  then^  what  evidence  of  their  exis- 
tence nowP  What  proof,  that  these  laws  which  regulate 
the  movements  of  the  universe,  are  any  other,  but  the 
varied  operations  of  the  same  power,  revealed  as  at  first, 
creating  the  heavens  and  the  earth?  If  these  laws  were 
at  all  impressed  on  matter,  it  must  have  received  this 
impression,  after  it  had  been,  first  by  the  direct  agency 
of  Deity,  organized  into  forms.  But  if  this  exhibit  su- 
blimer  views  of  his  character,  than  to  suppose  his  direct 
operations  to  be  still  continued,  then  on  the  same  mode 
of  reasoning,  to  maintain,  that  these  laws  were  impar- 
ted to  atoms,  as  soon  as  they  were  created,  and  that  by 
their  guidance,  matter  was  first  organized  into  forms, 
would  display  ideas  of  Deity  still  more  sublime;  and  to 
imagine,  that  he  laid  such  laws  on  empty  space,  as  with- 
out his  attention,  would  produce  atoms,  convert  them 
into  forms,  and  impart  to  them  all  those  powers  of  trans- 
formation, whose  unremitting  operations  we  constantly 
witness,  would  develope  ideas  the  most  sublime.  And 
thus,  we  should  prove,  that  we  could  support  a  most 
sublime  philosophy  by  a  total  rejection  of  the  account 


100 

that  God,  in  the  beginning  created  the  heavens  and  the 
earth/  This  system  wliicli  snatches  the  universe  from 
the  hand  of  God's  providence,  is  founded  on  the  hypo- 
thesis, that  the  theory  harmonizes  best  with  the  perfec- 
tions of  the  Supreme,  which  leaves  him  the  most  free 
from  care  and  activity,  in  the  mnnas^eraent  ol  the  world. 
It  considers  a  plan  unworthy  of  Infinite  wisdom,  which 
requires  his  constant  exertion.  And  thus  it  would  make 
him  the  Wisest  God  who  could  or  who  would  so  form 
his  plan  as  to  enjoy,  or  perhaps  we  ou2;ht  to  say  to  endure 
the  most  indolence.  If  that  system  he  true,  then,  Jeho 
vah  after  starting  the  machine  of  the  universe,  might  fall 
asleep,  or  be  annihilated,  and,  yet  nature  as  at  present, 
preserve  her  course  tliroughout  eternity.  Such  would 
be  an  Epicurean  divinity — a  God  of  ease  and  indolence 
— a  God  contrary  to  the  analogy  of  nature,  which  moves 
onward  with  an  untiring  course;  and  contrary  to  all  the 
ideas  of  the  great  Governor,  communicated  in  the  lives 
of  good  and  useful  men,  bearing  his  image,  whose  years 
abound  with  activity;  but  above  all;  such  a  God  is  op- 
posed to  the  God  of  the  Bible,  who  is  dcscril)ed  as  the 
Keeper  of  Israel  who  slumhers  not  nor  sleeps;  as  he 
who  upholds  all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power.  He 
stills  the  winds,  he  calms  the  seas;  at  his  command  the 
wheels  of  nature  pause;  and  the  sun  and  moon  stand 
still — Therefore  God  reigns  in  the  natural  world.  But, 
2.  He  rules  in  the  moral  world.  To  entertain  just 
conceptions  of  God's  moral  government,  we  must  first 
learn  his  perfections,  and  keep  our  eyes  steadily  fixed 
on  his  moral  character.  If  we  leave  this  totally^behind, 
or  carry  with  us  only  some  one  attribute,  whilst  the  o- 
thers  are  forgotten,  the  moral  universe  appears  a  track- 
less confusion,  a  maze  of  contradi(  tion,  and  perhaps  to 
some  minds,  even  a  theatre  of  injustice  and  merciless 
partiality — in  which  no  cause  is  seen — 

^^Why  unassuming  worth,  in  secret  lived, 
And  died  neglected:   Why  the  good  man's  share 
In  lifp  was  gall  and  bitterness  of  soul: 
Why  the  lone  widow  and  her  orphans  piaM 


In  starving  solitude:   While  Luxuiy 

In  palaces,  lay  straijiing  her  low  thoughts 

'Jo  form  unreal  wants:    V\  hy  heaven  hurn  Truth 

And  ^ moderation  fair,  wore  the  red  marks 

Of  Superstition's  scouige:    Why  licensed  pain, 

'1  hat  cruel  spoiler,  that  embosom'd  foe, 

Imbittered  all  our  bliss." 

And  whatever  may  be  the  conceited  orthodoxy  of  thosij 
whose  saint  is  the  infidel  philosopher — 

"Slow  to  no  act — who  takes  no  private  road, 
But  looks  through  nature,  up  to  nature's  God:" 

The  experience  of  ages,    teaches  man    the  hnmiliatin"- 
truth,  that  though  the  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God, 
and  the  firmament  sheweth   his  handy    work; — though 
reason  may  climb  the   ladder  of  nalure,    ufitil  inference 
looks  into  the  heavens,  and   hears  the  voice  of  a  power 
above  us;  yet,  that.  He  makes  darkness  his  secret  iiloce; 
and  the  jmvUion  round  about  him  are  dai'Jc   waters  and 
thick  clouds  of  the  skies.     Keason  when  sobered  by  pie- 
ty has  ever  descended  from  her  giddy  elevation,  exclai- 
ming in  despair,  "Who  by  sea>rching  can  find  out  God? 
Who  can  find    out  the   Almighty  unto  perfeclinn?"  and 
thus  ackowledging  that  nature,  can    only  tearh  reason, 
that  there  is  a  God,  but  informs  us  not  what  he  is — that 
eagle  eyed  philosophy  sees   not  up  half  way  to  Deity, 
and  thus    confirms  the    Scriptural  testimouy,   that   the 
world  by  wisdom  knetc  not  God.     Infidelity    has   often 
proudly  climbed  the  ladder  of  creation,  and  looked  up- 
on the  clouds  of  night,  that  surround  the  divine  habita- 
tion, until  dizzy  with  speculation,  she  sometimes  ima- 
gines, that  she  sees  the  shape  and  dimensions  of  Deity; 
just  as  superstition  staring  on  the  gloom  of  thick  mid- 
night, sometimes  imagines  that  she  beholds  spectres  and 
fairies;  and  hence  to  one  infidel,  he  has  appeared  to  be 
the  God  of  chance,  and   to  another   the  God  of  fate, 
whilst  others  less  credulous;  but   no  less  philosophical, 
have  candidly  confessed,  that  in  gazing  upon   the  vast 
expanse,  they  have  seen  NO  GOD, 


It  is  for  a  mind  that  can  expjind  itsi  If  over  all  the 
immeasurable  space  of  the  Almii^hty's  universe;  and 
dart  ifs  intelli^'ence  swifter  than  the  lii^htning  through 
the  pathU'SS  duration  of  a  past  and  a  future  eternity, 
and  witness  the  evolutions  of  his  eternal  plans  and  ope- 
rations— In  short  it  is  only  for  a  mind  that  is  Deity  him- 
self, to  learn  the  perfections  and  character  of  Deity  from 
his  works — Creation  is  too  vast  for  comprehension — 
It  is  higher  than  heaven  what  can  we  do?  It  is  deeper 
than  hell,  ivhat  can  we  knowP  The  measure  thereof  is 
longer  than  the  earth;  it  is  broader  than  the  sea.  How 
then  can  man  whose  space  is  but  a  point;  whose  dura- 
tion is  hut  a  moment;  atid  who  in  extent  and  duration, 
can  see  a  part  ten  thousand  times  less,  in  comparison 
with  the  whole  creation,  than  the  ten  thousanth  part  of 
a  grain  of  sand  to  the  dimensions  of  our  globe— how 
can  he  look  through  nature/  how  preposterous! — look 
through  nature^  up  to  nature's  God!  JSToman  theref(»re 
can  know  the  Father  but  the  Son  and  he,  to  ichomsoever 
the  Son  will  reveal  him.  The  Son  lias  revealed  God 
in  the  scrij)tures;  and  to  them  we  go  for  his  attributes, 
and  his  character.  Here  reason  finds  her  firmest  rock, 
lier  purest  light,  and  her  loftiest  elevation.  Here  are 
truths  given,  on  which  she  may  lawfully  exercise  her 
nt)blest  {>owers — things  that  are  rereahd^  and  we  may 
modestly  presume,  all  tijcir  (feducible  relations,  and 
legitimate  consequences  are  for  us. 

The  scriptures  exhibit  God  as  the  only  Wise.  Wis- 
dom is  the  power  of  jndging  rightly.  This  power  is 
then  one  of  his  perfections.  It  is  not  an  eternally  dor- 
mant power,  because  all  his  works  are  made  in  wisdom. 
Works  to  be  made  in  wisdom  must  be  made  so,  that 
they  can  rightly  be  judged  subervieut  to  some  end;  and 
if  so,  they  must  be  made  according  to  some  plan,  and 
this  plan  must  not  only  comprehend  things  themselves  as 
they  are  made,  but  must  extend  to  their  remotest  conse- 
quences: And  as  God  is  the  same  yesterday,  to  day, 
and  forever,  his  knowledge  and  intentions  mast  have 
been  forever  t!»e  same,  his  plan  must  be  eternal.  The 
ic{5(Zomand  immutability  of  God  therefore  secure  him 


103 

an  eternal  plan — a  doctrine  which  all  the  providences^ 
and  Prophecies  contained  in  the  Bihle  amply  confirm. 

God  has  also  revealed  himself  to  he  tho  Mmighty 
and  also  that  he  worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of 
his  own  will:  so  that  his  whole  plan  is  sure  to  he  ac- 
complished. 

In  his  own  volume  he  is  also  described,  as  a  God  who 
hates  sin  and  who  has  no  delight  in  the  death  of  the 
wicked.  From  this  we  may  rationally  conclude,  that 
in  forming  a  pUn,  in  which  he  would  be  most  deligh- 
ted, he  chose  one  of  those  possible  systems,  in  which 
there  wouhl  be  the  most  piety  and  happiness,  and  the 
least  ^m  and  misery.  And  if  the  question  be  agitated, 
why  was  a  system  chosen  in  which  any  sin  atid  misery 
wore  suffered  to  eniei? — we  think  a  reasonable  answer 
dedurible  from  his  revealed  perfections.  [t  was  a- 
gieeable  to  his  infinite  benevolence,  that  the  greatest 
possible  amount  of  happiness,  should  be  enjoyed  in  the 
created  universe.  In  order  to  this,  it  was  agreeable  to 
his  wisdom — which  it  is  but  modest  to  suppose  always 
chooses  that  which,  all  tilings  considered,  is  the  hest^ 
that  there  should  be  a  moral  system;  a  moral  system  aL 
ways  implies  natural  liberty:  it  is  essential  to  natural 
liberty,  not  to  be  controlled  by  the  comi)ulsion  of  phi- 
losophical Omnipotence,  and  thus  to  produce  the  grea- 
test amount  of  happiness,  and  to  exhibit  the  Maker's 
greatest  glory,  moral  creatures  must  be  governed  only 
by  placing  before  them  the  wisest  and  most  powerful 
motives.  And  thus  he  chose  a  moral  system  in  which 
sin  and  misery  were  foreseen,  as  certainly  finding  a 
place,  not  because  he  delighted  either  in  the  one  or  the 
other;  l>ut  because  in  one  of  the  best  systems  of  natural 
liberty,  that  could  be  chosen — one  best  adapted  to  pro- 
duce the  greatest  happiness  to  creatures,  and  to  reflect 
the  greatest  glory  on  the  Creator— some  amount  of  sin, 
and  some  degree  of  misery,  w^ould  be  the  certain  though 
not  the  rtccessary  result.  But  as  he  hates  sin  and  mise- 
ry he  chose  that  system  of  moral  beings,  in  whi<:'h  there 
would  certainly  be  as  little  of  either  as  in  any  other, 
that  could  have  been  chosen.     Thus  he  suffers  sin  and 


wo  into  the  universe;  because  in  any  system  of  natural 
liberty  so  extensive  as  the  present,  some  beings  will  sin, 
and  it  is  but  reasonable  to  infer,  that  he  has  chosen  the 
present  because  in  it  there  is  as  much  piely  and  happi- 
ness, and  as  little  sin  and  suffering,  as  in  any  other  that 
could  have  been  chosen. 

To  understand  how  tiie  actions  of  moral  beings  can 
be  decreed,  and  yet  free,  just  imagine,  that  wlien  God 
who  is  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  iniquity,  determined 
to  place  before  them  the  proper  moral  means  to  deter 
from  transgression,  and  invite  to  obedience,  he  also  de- 
termined, to  leave  them,  in  the  exercise  of  natural  liber- 
ty to  act,  as  coeternally  with  the  choice  of  his  plan,  he 
foresaw  they  certainly  would.  Now  is  any  contradic- 
tion involved  in  the  idea?  When  he  framed  the  system 
(if  moral  being,  he  determined  to  place  before  Adam  the 
tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil;  to  inform  him,  that 
it  was  his  requirement,  that  of  it  hc^  should  not  eat;  to  an- 
nounce with  the  law  the  penalty,  the  day  thou  eatest 
thereof  thou  shalt  surHy  die — and  thus  to  exhibit  before 
him  all  die  motives  to  obedience,  which  the  holy  good- 
ness of  the  Lawgiver  demanded  to  prevent  the  thing 
which  he  hated;  and  then  determined  to  leave  him,  in 
the  use  of  natural  liberty  to  choose  as  coeternally  with 
the  adoption  of  his  moral  system  he  foresaw  he  would. 
He  determined  to  command  Pharaoh  to  let  his  people 
go;  to  threaten  him  with  plagues  as  a  consequence  of  his 
refusing;  and  then  to  suffer  him,  in  the  exercise  of  that 
natural  liberty  essential  to  a  moral  being,  to  act  accor- 
ding to  his  choice  certainly  foreknown.  And  such  were 
his  determinations  with  regard  to  the  Israelites  to  whom 
he  pronounced  his  law  and  proclaimed  the  penalty,  that 
in  case  of  transgression,  their  land  should  fall  into  the 
hands  of  their  enemies,  and  they  should  be  carried  away 
captive;  and  after  all  this,  to  let  them,  in  the  exercise  of 
that  natural  liberty  essential  to  accountable  beings,  take 
the  course  which  he  eternally  knew  they  certainly 
would  choose.  And  in  his  eternal  plan,  such  are  his 
dealings  with  the  heathen  world.  He  eternally  deter- 
mined to  unfold  before  their  eyes  the  pages  of  nature — 


105 

the  things  that  are  made — to  reveal  for  their  instructioQ 
liis  eternal  power  and    God  head,    whence  to  infer   his 
law  and  the  penalty;    and,  then  to  let  them  make  their 
choice  of  obedience  or  of  disobedience,  to  him  eternally 
foreknown  as  the  certain    result  of  their  existence  and 
circumstances.      This  it  is  believed  is  the  only  way  in 
whicli  Hh  decrees    the  existence   of  m\.     He    decrees 
not,  that  it  shall  he,  but  merely  as  the  certain  result  of  a 
moral  system,  that  its  existence  shall  be  suffered:  and  it 
is  sitffered^  because  all  things  wisely  considered,  it  is 
better  that  it  should  be  suffered,  than  that  there  should 
Le  no  moral  existences.      Fhus  if  God's  moral  subjects 
in  his  plan  are  suffered  to  sin,  it  is,  because  in  the  best 
plan  of  moral  government  they  will  sin.     Now,  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  see,  how  decreeing   lo   let  creatures   exercise 
their  natural  liberty,  can  be  the  destruction  of  that  li- 
berty, and  yet  many  assert,  that  if  a  creature's  actions 
be  decreed,  they  cannot  be   free!   Divested  of  all   am- 
liiguities,  it  is  nothing  less,  than  asserting,  that  the  God 
of  Heaven   and    earth,   cannot  decree   natural  liberty 
to    his    moral    subjects!— An    assertion    that   certainly 
ought  not  to  be  admitted  without  proof;  especially  since 
we  find  it  opposed  by  a  number  of  Scriptures,  such  as — 
Who   worketh  AH  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own 
icill.     Him  being  delivered  by  the  determinate  counsel 
add  foreknowledge  of  God,  ye  have  taken  and   by   wic- 
ked hands  have  crucified   and  slain,  which  can  not  be 
evaded  but  by  being  converted  into  figures.     Thus  even 
sin  falls  within  his  plan;  yet  he  hates  it  as  an  abomina- 
ble thing;  tenijits  no  man    to  evil;  and  does  all  that  can 
be  done  by  a  moral  governor,  to  prevent  its  very  exis- 
tence.    And  thus   we  see,  that  the  ingress  of  sin  into 
the  universe,  is  no  argument,  that  the  plan  of  Him,  who 
Tuleth  over  all,  does  not  extend  to  every  event — evil  as 
well  as  good. 

Though,  through  his  great  goodness  and  holiness, 
opposed  to  sin  in  its  very  existence;  yet,  since  through 
the  abuse  of  the  creature's  natural  liberty  it  will  find 
place,  be  exercises  not  over  it  the  Providence  of  "bare 
permission;  but  snch  as  hath  joined  with  it^  a  most  wise 

14 


1U6 

aud  powerful  bound  ins;,  and  otherwise  orderins;,  and 
governing"  to  *^his  own  ends;  yet  so  as  the  sintuhiess 
thereof  [uoreedeth  ordy  from  the  creature  and  not  from 
(rod'"*  Ifihe  sins  of  a  haughty  and  a  cruel  monarch, 
would  not  he  prevented,  GtKl  would  choose,  that  they 
fcihcudd  be  comoiitted,  in  the  chastisement  of  the  children 
of  Israel  for  their  sins;  aud,  that  they  should  not  hap- 
pen in  any  otiier  way,  he  would  bar  up  other  aveuues 
with  his  own  iuterposing  providence — And  hence  his 
language  by  the  prophet  is—/  iciU  send  him  against  an 
lujpucrificat  notion,  and  against  the  people  of  my  ivrath 
will  I  give  him  a  charge,  to  take  the  spoil,  and  to  take 
the  prey,  and  to  tread  them  down  as  the  mire  of  the 
streets.  Howbeit,  he  meaneth  not  so;  neither  doth  his 
heart  think  so;  but  it  is  in  his  heart  to  destroy  and  cut 
off  nations,  not  a  few.\  If  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate 
with  the  Gentiles  anil  the  people  of  Israel,  would  not 
forsake  their  sins  in  some  form,  God  presents  before 
them  the  Saviour  and  all  the  circumstances  by  which 
he  knew,  they  would  be  gathered  together  against  his 
h(dy  child  Jesus,  to  do  what  his  hand  and  his  counsel 
before  determined  to  be  done;  because,  though  they 
meant  not  so.  neither  did  their  hearts  think  so;  yet  their 
sins  in  this  form  better  than  in  any  other,  could  be  o- 
verruled,  so  as  to  display  the  brightest  glory,  that  ever 
shone  on  the  immensity  of  the  intelligent  universe. 
And  since  the  ambition  of  an  Alexander  and  a  Caesar, 
would  not  be  restrained  in  its  risings  by  the  moral  in- 
structions conveyed  by  the  light,  that  shone  in  the  things 
that  are  made,  he  gave  success  to  their  armed  legions,  to 
break  down  the  strong  holds  of  iniquity,  to  scourge  guil- 
ty nations,  and  to  carry  with  their  conquests,  the  letters 
of  Greece  and  Home,  and  their  best  heathen  civilization 
from  eastern  Asia  to  western  Europe,  and  from  the  par- 
ched coast  of  southern  Africa,  to  the  icy  shores  of  the  nor- 
thern sea;  that  by  the  former  the  literature  of  Greece  soon 
to  be  eternalized  by  the  Evangelists  and  the  Apostles 
as  the  vehicle  of  inspiration  to  carry  the  written  Gospel 

•Confession  of  Faith,  chap.  r.  sec.  4.     jlsai  x.  6,  7. 


107 

to  the  nations,  might  be  conveyed  as  far  and  as  wide, 
as  liiscon(]uests,  and,  that  by  the  other  the  known  world 
might  l)e  united  in  one  great  empire  around  the  banner 
of  the  Roman  eagle,  and  thus  the  Apostles  under  the 
protection  of  its  wings,  might  traverse  the  globe  and 
preacli  the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  '1  bus  if  as  a  mo- 
ral governor,  he  suffers  to  find  place  in  his  universe 
the  least  possible  amount  of  sin,  and  contrcds  and  go- 
verns that  least  possible  amount,  so  as  to  effect  the  least 
evil,  and  to  become  subservient  io  the  greatest  amount 
of  good,  which  its  nature  permits,  its  existence  in  bis 
accountable  creation,  an<l  his  governing  that  existence, 
so  as  to  |)revent  it  in  one  form  of  disiibedience  arnl  to 
permit  in  another,  is  entirely  consistent  with  his  infinite 
benevolence  which  desires  the  greatest  amount  of  good, 
with  his  infinite  wisdom,  which  directs  to  the  l)est  pos- 
sible ends,  and  with  his  omnipotence,  which  eff(^cts  all 
that  his  goodness  directed  l)y  his  wisdom  dictates  to  be 
done. 

A  difficulty  arises  in  the  minds  of  mar>y,  because  by 
the  Scriptures  we  are  taught,  that  GimI  withhehl  from 
Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Sodom,  the  privileges  which,  had 
they  been  afforded,  would  have  proved  effectual  for  their 
reformation,  and  granted  theui  to  Chorazin,  Bethsaida, 
and  (>aperuaum,  on  whose  inhabitants  they  were  unpro- 
ductive of  any  good —  Wo  unto  the  Chorazin/  Wo  unto 
the  Bethsaida!  for  if  the  mighty  ivorks,  which  were 
done  in  you,  had  been  done  in  Tyre  and  Sidon,  they 
would  have  repented  long  ago  in  sackcloth  and  ashes. 
But  I  say  unto  you,  that  it  shall  be  more  tolerahle^  for 
Tyre  and  Sidon  at  the  day  of  judgment  than  for  you, 
And  thou  Cajyernaum;  which  art  exalted  to  heaven^ 
shalt  be  brought  down  to  hell,  for  if  the  mighiy  works 
which  have  been  done  in  thee,  had  been  done  in  Sodom^ 
it  would  have  remained  until  this  day.  But  1  say  unto 
-lyoie,  that  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  the  land  of  Sodom 
in  the  day  of  judgment  than  for  thee.  Why,  it  is  asked, 
were  those  great  works  fruitlessly  done  in  Chorazin, 
and  Bethsaida,  which  if  performed  in  Tyre  and  Sidon, 
would  have  produced  repentance?— And  why  were  the 


108 

inhabitants  of  Capernaum,  by  mighty  miracles  and  hea 
venly  doch'iues  uuavailingly  addressed,  and  Sodom  left 
without  the  miracles  and  the  instructions  of  au  incarnate 
Saviour,  to  be  consumed  by  fire,  when  the  same  means, 
which  by  the  former  were  unimproved,  in  the  latter 
Would  have  produced  a  lasting  reformation?  To  say, 
that  the  governor  of  the  world,  in  this  acted  without  de- 
sign, or,  that  his  design  was  regulated  by  a  mere  capri- 
cious choice,  regardless  of  consequences  or  of  the  consis- 
tency of  his  own  character,  is  not  such  a  sulution  as 
affords  any  relief  to  an  enquiring  mind.  In  teaching 
that  God  affords  the  means  of  repentance  to  some 
which  he  denies  to  others,  these  texts  directly  contra- 
dict the  doctrine  violently  advocated  by  many,  who  are 
regulated  in  their  theological  opinions,  more  by  caprice 
or  by  the  prejudices  of  a  mislaken  education,  than  by 
the  good  word  of  life,  erroneously  suppi)se,  tliat  God 
dispenses  his  means  of  salvation,  equally  to  all;  and  in 
informing  us,  that  these  extraordinary  means  wire  with- 
held from  Sodom,  on  account  of  which  withholding  its 
guilty  inhabitants  were  then  enduring  <^p  vengeance  of 
eternal  fire, ^  they  would  frown  into  silence  anotlier 
class  of  objectors,  nearly  allied  (o  these,  who  suppose 
\hat  on  account  of  no  means  denied  to  men  in  this  life; 
will  their  condition  be  any  worse  in  a  v^orld  to  come, 
but  they  do  not  teach  us,  that,  because  Chorazin,  Helh- 
saida,  and  Capernaum,  had  witnessed  mii;hfy  works, 
that  would  have  saved  Tyre,  Si  Ion,  and  Sodom,  had 
they  been  displayed  in  those  wicked  cities,  the  latter 
were  left  destitute  of  so  much  of  the  teachings  of  nature 
and  Providence,  as  leaves  them  without  excuse.  From 
the  will  of  God  to  give  in  the  one  case  and  to  deny  in 
the  other,  we  ought  to  infer,  that  the  dispensation  was 
like  himself,  wise,  just,  and  good,  and  a  little  attention 
to  hints  given  in  the  Scriptures,  will  confirm  the  conclu- 
sion. In  the  economy  of  a  wise  and  a  good  God,  \i  ap- 
pears reasonable  to  infer,  that  the  time  and  the  place, 
best  suited  to  produce  the  widest  exteat  of  good,  would 

•Jndc  7. 


t09 

be  selected  for  his  operations.  But  because,  by  the  ad- 
vent, miracles,  and  doctrines  of  Jesus  Christ,  Sodom 
might  have  been  .saved,  there  is  no  argument  tiiat  the 
days  of  Sodom  was  the  time  in  which  Ins  appeaiauce 
on  earth  w  ould  have  produced  so  mucii  happii;ess  to  the 
universe,  or  so  ^real  a  revenue  of  glory  to  the  divine 
character,  or  even  so  much  good  (o  the  iidiabitants  of 
this  world,  as  was  produced  by  liis  appearing  in  the 
fulness  of  God's  on\  n  time.  It  w<»uld  be  no  argument, 
that  a  general  sh«iu]d  march  a  mighty  array  on  a  certain 
da3%  because  l»e  might  then  save  from  burning  a  few 
tents,  spread  along  tiie  shores  of  a  fisiiery,  when  by  wai- 
ting to  march  at  a  future  time,  he  nuglM  save  an  empire 
from  desolaticn.  In  tl>e  (!r.ys  of  Hodom.  (r.e  world 
was  not  yet  prepared  for  the  Saviour's  ij{)|)earance  in 
the  flesh.  I  hus  it  i-s  fuir  lo  conclude.  t!;»t  i'hiisL  dit! 
liOt  perform  his  mighly  works  in  Hudom,  be(  ausr  (hut 
devot^'d  city  existed  not  at  the  best  time  for  the  display 
of  his  incarnation,  and  (d'  Ifis  wrriderwoiki  .g  pnwer; 
and.  that  he  did  perform  them  i!»  Caperiiauau  because 
the  fulness  of  tin«e  had  ( ome  for  God  to  reveal  his  Son, 
niakp  a  Gospel  di^^play  of  his  grace,  and  to  denionstrate 
by  miracles  befoie  unseen,  and  by  (hx  trims  b<'fnre  un- 
taught the  divinity  of  his  mission,  and  this  not  merely 
for  [jroducing  faith  \\\  utd>elipving  rapernaum,  but  for 
performing  deeds  and  iiDparting  prece|>(s  to  be  preached 
bv  his  ministers  from  asie  to  ai^e  for  the  recovery  of  a 
lost  world. 

And  as  Ihe  ai^e  of  Hodom  was  not  the  time,  so  Tyre 
and  Sidon,  were  not  (he  places,  in  which  to  display  the. 
testimonials  of  his  mission,  'rhougli  the  repentancp  of 
the  inhabitants  of  tliese  cities,  wcsuld  have  caused  Jo// 
in  heaven;  yet  to  produce,  no  doubt,  a  greater  joy,  the 
Saviour  in  his  bodily  jjresence  was  not  sent,  but  to  the 
lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.  To  their?  pertained 
the  adoption  and  the  glory,  and  the  cnrenavts,  nnd  the 
giving  the  law  and  the  promise  s»  whose  were  the  fathers; 
andean  horn,  as  concerning  the  flesh,  Christ  cnme.— 
To  effect  the  greatest  good  to  the  human  family — to 
sanction  the  living  oracles  of  a  dispensation  then  draw^- 


110 


ins;  to  a  close,  but  to  wliich  the  (Tospcl  was  a  counter- 
part, to  place  on  Calvary,  and  ^ntlier  around  the  cross, 
a  bliZH  of  evidence,  that  would  throw  its  radiance  over 
the  habitable  earth,  and  convey  it'^  convictions  to  tlie 
latest  ag<*s;  and  to  exhil)it  to  tlie  eyes  of  an  intelligent 
universe  a  spectacle  of  hurailiaiion,  obedience,  and  suf- 
ferin;^;;  to  tiie  most  exalted  minds,  before  unknown;  and 
not  merely  to  consecrate,  by  the  august  transaction,  the 
earth,  which  was  made  its  theatre,  or  the  inhabitants^ 
who  became  its  witnesses,  was  the  ^'reat  oljject  of  tlie 
Saviour's  pil2;rima^e.  'IMiese  errand  desi£;ns  could  be 
best  accomplished  by  confiuinii;  Ins  opieratious,  princi- 
pally to  the  holy  land,  and  not  by  exhiliitius;  them  to 
the  (rentile  inhaf)itants  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  or  the  [)0- 
])ulation  of  any  ot'uer,  then  uncovena»»ted  lands.  The 
lime  in  which  to  throw  to  the  s^round  the  partition  waW^ 
that  separated  the  Jew  from  the  Gentile,  was  not  yet 
fully  come.  In  the  best  chosen  system  of  redeeming 
mercy,  salvation  was  of  the  .lews.  And  a  link  of  that 
ii;«>ldeu  chain  which  was  to  lift  millions  to  heaven  must 
not  be  broken  merely  to  atchieve  the  penitence  of  the 
few  inhabitants  of  Tyre  and  Sidon. 

Tiie  moral  dispensations  of  God  in  relation  to  these 
riliHs,  commnnicatecl  by  the  Saviour,  affords  a  light  to 
conduct  us  through  the  shades  of  mystery  that  encom- 
])ass  his  Providejice  towards  the  heathen  world.  Eigh- 
teen centuries  have  gone  through  llieir  revolutions  since 
the  command  passed  the  lips  of  the  ascending  Jiedee- 
mer  '*Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  Gospel 
to  every  creature."  And  yet  after  a-I  the  preaching, 
prayers,  and  martyrdoms  of  heaven-lM>rn  christiaidty, 
:)t  the  present  hour,  three-fourths  of  this  world's  po{)u- 
lation  liave  never  heard  thejoijfal  sound.  The  cloud 
of  idolatry  as  deep  as  midnight  stretches  itself  over  the 
whole  expanse  of  tawny  Asia  and  sable  Africa,  and 
spreading  its  wings  darkens  the  skies  of  a  large  por- 
tion of  southern  and  western  America  and  continental 
Europe,  save  here  and  there  a  spot  where  the  sun  of 
righteousness  forces  his  rays  and  mingles  a  twilight 
\vith  the  solitude  of  the  gloom. 


HI 


When  from  the  wide  spreading  empire  of  moral  ruin 
the  chrisfian  philanthropist  hears  the  cry  of  millions  as 
the)  sink  from  a  dark  to  a  darker  doom,  his  soul  melts 
with  compassion  and  his  faith  staogers  at  the  protracted 
march  of  that  providence  sniBciently  omnij)otent  to  level 
every  wall  and  sink  every  mountain  of  opposition,  to 
demolish  every  temple  and  citadel  of  idolatry,  to  cast  to 
the  ground  every  Ijagon,  Eaal,  and  Moloch,  and  to 
bear  the  light  of  clirisiiaiiity,  through  all  the  length  and 
the  breadth  of  the  r('i^ion  and  the  shadow  of  death;  but 
which  in  the  steady  marcli  of  eighteen  hundred  years 
has  traversed  only  one  quarter  of  the  globe.  He  asks 
why  in  the  government  of  a  God  whose  tender  mercies 
are  over  all  his  works  —why  does  the  Sun  of  righte- 
ousness pour  his  lifegiving  light  over  so  small  a  pcntiow 
of  the  inhabitants  of  this  world  and  leave  such  a  four- 
fold majority  of  millions  to  the  shades  and  the  shiver- 
ings  of  a  cheerless  midnightof  moral  winter?  How  is  he  to 
resolve  the  doubt  and  be  prepared  to  vindicate  the  ways 
of  God  to  man?  If  he  say  that  beathenism  equals 
Christianity  in  this  life,  a  survey  of  the  abominable  ty- 
ranny of  the  stronger  sex  over  the  weaker,  of  the  adul- 
teries and  idolatries,  and  of  the  parricides,  infanticides, 
and  suicides  of  nnchristianized  nations,  refutes  the  af- 
firmation and  proves  it  as  contrary  to  fact  as  it  is  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Bible-  If  he  ask  the  heathen  oracles  fiu' 
Immortality,  they  are  dumb,  and  thus  silently  acknow- 
ledge that  Christianity  only  brings  life  and  immortality 
to  light.  If  he  imagine  that  without  revelation  the  light 
of  nature  will  conduct  the  --ubjects  of  heathenism  to  hea- 
ven, God  meeting  him  with  acontiadiction  declaies  that 
where  there  is  no  vision,  the  j)eople  perish.  If  in  a 
multitude  of  doubts  he  suppose  that  the  long  reign  of 
heathenism  over  so  large  a  portion  of  this  world's  popu- 
lation was  an  aj)pointmetit  of  God  in  preference  to  the 
universal  dominion  of  Christianity,  t!ie  revealed  lan- 
guage of  refutation  is,  that  he  will  have  all  men  to  be 
mvedand  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth. 


113 

Thus  borne  on  tli2wins;of  coTijpcture  from  one  moun- 
tain-lop of  theory  to  another,  he  at  Ihst  dismounts  and 
descending;  to  the  valh^y  of  pious  submission,  rests  on 
the  tnith  that  tfip  Lord  reigndh,  and,  that  ihojudsje  of 
nil  the  earth  will  do  right,  i  >n  such  a  truth  as  on  a  rock, 
he  may  securely  rest — God  is  just,  and  will  do  right;  he 
is  good  and  the  earth  is  full  of  his  goodness;  he  is  infinite 
as  well  as  good,  and  his  tender  mercies  are  over  all  his 
works;  he  is  omnipotent,  and  doth  his  pleasure.  i  he 
conclusion,  is  reasonable  that  his  <lispensations  to- 
wards  the  heathen,  are  consistent  with  himself;  and  if  so, 
they  are  under  the  influence  of  intinite  gnudness,  direc- 
ted l)y  a  wise  and  a  jusc  OmnipoiencF;  fiut  they  ought 
ever  to  be  regarded  in  reference',  not  to  a  partial,  but  a 
general  good — Tod  is  over  all;  hi^  kingfom  is  an  evprlas- 
tin;j;  li'ingdom^  and  to  his  dominion  there  is  no  e,nh 
The  systeQi  to  whose  generul  good,  the  operations  of  his 
government  tend,  is  boui'ded  un!v  by  infinite  space,  and 
is  in  proo:ress/r67?2  ^verlnstivg  to  everlasting.  Now  if 
evil  be  the  object  of  his  holy  aversioit,  ami  is  suffered 
into  the  universe  at  aM,  only  because,  in  the  best  possible 
system,  some  moral  agents  irill  sin,  it  is  impossible 
tiiat  he  should  delight  in  the  abominations  of  heathen 
lands;  and  it  appears  agreeable  to  the  divine  nature,  and 
to  the  analogy  of  his  known  dispensations,  that  he  should 
employ  all  the  moral  means,  consistent  with  the  greatest 
go(»d  of  the  whole  system,  to  prevent  these  evils;  and  this 
inference,  we  find,  accords  with  the  holy  records  of  facts, 
tor  the  invisible  thin^^s  of  him  from  the  creation  of  the 
world  are  clearly  seen  being  understood  bii  the  things  that 
are  made^  even  his  eternal  power  and  Godhead;  so  that 
theijare  without  excuse.  Thus,  however  little,  creation 
may  teach  us  of  what  God  is,  it  clearly  reveals  his  exis- 
tence and  his  power,  and  tlumgh  this  knowledge  is  not  of 
itself  sullicietjt  to  accpiaiid  us  with  the  only  ??ame  given 
under  heaven  among  men  whereby  we  mu^tbe  saved;  and 
though  where  there  is  no  vis'on  the  people  perish;  yet  if 
when  men  w  ilhout  God's  written  word,  know  there  is  a 
power  above  them,  they  would  yield  to  fhe  conviction 
naturally  produced  by  t!ie  knowledge  of  his  existence. 


lis 

that  his  character,  and  his  will,  ought  to  he  sought  and 
known,  and  would  they  act  on  that  conviction,  hy  him 
who  spake  to  Noah,  Ahraham,  Joh,  and  other  holy  men 
of  the  old  dispensation,  In  thoughts  from  the  visions  of 
tke  night,  when  deep  sleep  falieih  upon  men,  things 
might  be  secretly  brought  to  thm,  which  would  reveal 
a  Saviour  and  the  way  of  obtaining  salvation  through 
his  name.  80  that  with  all  the  deep  shades  of  abomi- 
nation  and  misery,  that  engloom  the  picture  of  the  hea- 
then and  without  adoj)ting  the  belief,  as  contrary  to  fact 
as  it  is  to  the  word  of  God,  that  the  temporal  and  eter- 
nal interests  of  men,  are  as  well  secured  by  heathenism 
as  Christianity,  it  is  entijely  possible,  that  out  of  his 
more  ordinary  course  of  revealing  himself  to  the  world 
by  the  canon  of  his  written  will,  he  may  speak  mercy 
and  redemption  in  the  ear  of  the  serious  and  seeking 
son  of  the  forest,  whose  eye  has  never  been  enlightened 
by  a  written  page.  This  is  a  work  of  goodness  and 
mercy,  which  God  has  done  under  the  Old  l^stament 
economy,  and  which  he  can  and  may  still  do;  but  after 
all  these  possibilities  and  probabilities  the  christian  who 
in  any  considerable  degree,  partakes  of  the  purity  and 
the  benevolence  of  his  Mast(  r,  can  not  survey  the  abodes 
of  the  heathen  without  horror  at  their  crimes,  and  com- 
passion at  their  miseries,  or  without  raising  the  voice  of 
supplication,  (')  God,  how  long  shall  the  adversary  re- 
proach? Shall  the  enemy  blaspheme  thy  name  for  ever? 
O  Lord  God  of  hosts,  how  lung  wilt  thou  be  angry  a- 
gainst  the  prayer  of  thy  people? 

As  nations,  almost  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  globe  have 
rejected  the  Gospel.  But  if  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  the  wicked,  it  is  asked,  <»why  does  he  not  era- 
ploy  his  omnipotence  to  prostrate  all  opposition  to  his 
truth,  and  to  scatter  every  cloud,  that  casts  it  deathly 
shade  over  the  surface  of  this  earth? — Here  is  the  bur- 
den under  which  the  faith  of  many  a  good  man  totters. 
This  difficulty  arises  wholly  from  that  system  of  theo- 
logical philosophy,  which  forgetting,  that  the  moral  cre- 
ation is  a  system  of  natural  liberty,  not  to  be  guided  by 

15 


114 

coercion,  hut  by  moral  cause?,  strangely  .suppo«es,  phy- 
jsical  and  moral  ellects  eqiially  the  ohjects  of  the  divine 
omnipotence.  Whereas  the  Scriptures  constantly  re- 
present God,  except  in  the  agencij  bij  which  he  rrcre- 
ntes  the  sinner  after  his  own  image  Lost  by  the  fall,  as 
emphjying  his  omnipotence  in  the  governnient  of  thft 
moral  world,  only  in  presentins;  motives  to  influence  the 
snl)jects  of  natural  liberty  to  obedience,  by  addressing 
llieir  hopes,  their  fears,  or  their  love  by  objects  of  desire, 
terror,  or  affection.  Thus  by  iiis  mi^;hty  icorks  the  8a- 
vi(»nr  presented  motives,  to  Chorazin.  Jiethsaida,  and 
Capernaum  ineffectual,  which  on  the  hopes  and  the 
fears  of  Tyre,  hidon,  and  Sndom  would  so  have  ope- 
rated that  their  guilty  inhabitants  would  have  sought  and 
found  that  regeneraliag  Spirit,  who  in  them  wculd  have 
produced  a  happy  re|)cntance.  So  that  the  subjection 
of  the  heathen  worbi  to  the  easy  and  peaceful  dominion 
of  the  Gospel,  is  only  indirectly  the  object  of  physical 
omnipotence,  and  their  is  no  discrepance  between  the 
omnipotence  of  Jehovah  and  his  will,  that  all  men  be 
saved. 

So  far  as  the  exertion  of  mere  omnipotence  is  con- 
cerned, for  any  thins;  we  can  say,  God  might  regenerate 
the  savage  without  employing  any  outward  means,  ad- 
dressed either  to  his  hopes  or  his  fears,  to  influence  him 
to  a  willingness  for  such  a  change;  but  as  the  fact  is  o- 
therwise  -as  the  whole  history  of  his  dispensations 
proves,  that  as  it  was  by  man's  choice  influenced  by 
motives  presented  by  the  tempter,  he  lost  his  Maker's 
image,  so  also,  by  man's  choice  influenced  by  motives 
addressed  by  the  Spirit  of  merc^'*  this  image  is  restored, 
and  as  it  is  presumed,  that  God's  actual  mode  of  dea- 
ling  with  man  is  as  consistent  with  inflnile  perfection, 
as  any  other  possible;  the  conclusion  is  unavoidable, 
that  it  is  not  consistent  with  all  the  attributes  of  the  di- 
vine character  to  re-create  a  fallen  intelligent  being 
without  flrst  addressing  that  natural  liberty  essential  to 
his  moral  nature. 

By  our  Saviour,  we  are  taught,  that  the  motives  pre- 
sented  by   the  light  of  nature,  or  by  the  cxampla  of 

•See  note  A . 


11^ 

iigliteous  Lot,  to  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom,  were  not 
such  as  prevented  them  from  bc'in^  sinnprs  forcei'dhis^ly; 
Uui  that  his  own  mighty  woiks,  had  they  been  done  a- 
inong  that  [)to|)le,  would  iiave  been  instrumental  in 
changing  their  character.  Thus  in  other  circumstances, 
motives  sufficiently  powerful  might  iiave  been  presented, 
to  have  secured  their  salvation.  On  a  parity  of  reason- 
ing in  other  circumstances  motives  might  have  been  ad- 
dressed to  the  men  of  Capernaum  so  powerful,  as  to  have 
secured  their  repentance.  And  pursuing  the  thought 
suggested  by  our  Saviour,  we  naturally  infer,  that  in 
certain  circumstances  motives  might  be  employed  suffi- 
ciently mighty  to  overcome  the  obstinacy  of  the  moht 
hardened  and  the  most  embruted  of  the  humankind. 
But  the  days  of  Sodom  were  not  the  best  time,  nor  Tyre 
and  Sidon  the  choicest  places  for  these  strong  motives 
exhibited  to  Chorazin,  Bethsaida,  and  Caj)ernaum,  to 
be  presented.  And  as  in  the  progress  of  the  (riispel 
di8|»ensation,  the  evidence  of  the  divine  origin  of  Chris- 
tianity, has  been  increasing  from  the  days  of  our  Sa- 
viour until  tlie  present  hour,  as  light  from  the  morning 
dawn  to  the  strength  of  the  full  risen  sun,  perhaps,  had 
the  evidence  now  before  us  been  presented  to  them, 
they  w  ould  have  repented  in  sackcloth  and  ashes.  And 
periiaps  should  the  Gospel  march  forward  accumula- 
ting evidence  in  its  progress,  until  it  rises  to  the  mere- 
diaa  of  the  millenial  day,  motives  then  so  irresistible 
may  be  exhibited,  as  to  command  the  submission  of  the 
world,  and  heavenly  truth  rise  in  a  blaze  so  strong,  as 
to  dispel  from  the  whole  earth  every  shade  of  moral 
night.  And  thus,  as  was  ihe  case  with  Sodom,  we 
may  see,  the  time  has  not  yet  come  for  Deity,  consis- 
tently with  the  best  plan  of  his  moral  operations,  to 
place  before  the  heathen  world  those  irresistible  motives 
by  the  instrumentality  of  which  the  nations  will  all  be 
given  to  the  Son  for  his  inheritance. 

If  then  to  every  human  being,  that  walks  the  globe, 
a  light  is  afforded  which  renders  him  excuseless,  and 
in  the  improvement  of  which  a  merciful  God  may  im- 
part more  light,  and  if  the  means  best  adapted  to  man's 


llff 

moral  nature,  and  the  raost  coDsistent  witli  Infinite  Per- 
fection, and  the  genenil  good  of  the  universe,  have  e- 
ver  been  in  progress  for  the  final  redemption  of  the 
world,  then  God's  ways  toward  the  heathen,  may  be 
vindicated  before  all  the  hissing  legions  of  imj)ious  scof- 
fers, and  faith  discover  how  every  mouth  shall  be  stojft 
and  all  the  world  become  guilty  before  God. 

J3esides,  for  any  thing  we  can  tell,  God  raaj  foresee, 
that  in  many  places,  if  the  Gospel  be  sent,  it  will  not 
be  received,  but  only  be  so  abused,  as  to  deepen  the 
condemnation  of  their  wretched  inhabitants;  and  since 
he  foreknows  they  will  force  their  way  to  ruin,  whe 
ther  the  Gospel  be  sent  to  them  or  not,  his  goodness 
and  mercy  may  permit  them  lo  sink  to  their  place  with 
only  the  guilt  incurred  by  the  light  of  nature  rather 
than  to  increase  their  guilt  by  sending  them  a  brighter 
revelation. 

By  some,  this  view  of  God's  dispensations  towards 
the  ungospelized  nations,  will  be  supposed  to  give  too 
prominent  a  place  in  the  picture,  to  the  will  of  the  crea- 
ture, and  to  leave  omnipotence  too  much  in  the  shade. 
But  if  the  objection  suppose  the  direct  agency  of  omni- 
potence without  the  instrumentality  of  any  moral 
means,  prepares  the  minds  of  the  heathen  for  the  re- 
ception of  the  Gospel,  and  the  theory  here  defended, 
that  the  divine  wisdom  and  power  were  at  first  employ- 
ed in  constructing  and  forming  that  moral  machinery  of 
man's  nature,  whose  natural  liberty  being  addressed  by 
motives,  equally  secures  the  same  results,  it  is  difficult 
to  discover,  how  the  objection  presents  any  advantage 
in  the  exhibition  of  Omnipotence;  but  easy  to  perceive, 
that  it  fails  in  dis[)layini;  the  wisdom  of  God  in  his  ori^ 
giniil  plan  and  in  reconciling  his  goodness  and  mer- 
cy with  his  ways  in  the  government  of  men. 

Thus  God  not  only  overrules  even  tlie  wickedness  of 
transgressors,  in  this  world,  so  as  out  of  evil  to  produce 
good;  but  he  holds  them  as  the  subjects  of  his  justice 
and  his  power  in  the  world  to  come.  When  his  long 
suffering  has  permitted  them  to  fill  up  the  measure  of 
their  iniquity  ia  this  life,  he  commissions  death  his  raes- 


117 

senger  to  cut  them  down,  and  bring  them  prisoners  to 
judgment.  Here  his  invitation,  come  unto  me  is  con- 
verted into  a  terrible  command,  Depart  from  me  ye 
cursed  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  ^or  the  Devil  and 
lus  angels;  and  his  expostulations  of  mercy.  Why  will 
ye  die?  into  vindicatory  displays  of  omnipotence— to 
create  the  worm  that  never  dies,  and  to  enkindle  the  fire 
that  is  never  quenched.  Here  he  is  seated  on  a  throne 
of  grace;  there  he  asrends  a  throne  of  burning  justice. 
Here  he  holds  a  sceptre  of  mercy,  there  he  wields  a 
rod  of  iron  to  dash  his  enemies  in  pieces.  The  power 
and  the  wisdom,  that  here  work  wonders  suited  to  turn 
them  from  iniquity  and  to  convert  them  to  righteousness 
are  there  employed  to  inflict  eternal  pains  and  enkindle 
everlasting  burnings  on  all  them  who  will  not  now  know 
God  and  obey  the  Gospel. 

If  God  rule  the  wicked,  much  more  his  saints.  He 
not  unfrequently  leads  them  in  strange  ways  and 
through  deep  waters;  but  ever  defendingthem  t*hrou«-h 
floods  and  fires,  he  keeps  them  by  his  own  pcAver  through 
faith  unto  salvation.  On  earth  he  not  unfrequently 
rules  them  with  fftlherly  chastisements,  but  in  heaven 
always  with  pure  love.      But  we  are, 

1£.  To  consider  why  the  Government  of  God  should 
he  the  cause  of  joy.     On  this  we  must  be  brief. 

It  ought  to  be  the  cause  of  joy,  that  the  whole  uni- 
Terse  is  governed  by  Deity,  accordirjg  to  a  plan  the 
most  consistent  with  his  wisdom,  justice,  and  goodness, 
every  part  of  which  will  certainly  be  fulfilled.  From 
the  minutest  atom  to  the  loftiest  seraph,  every  creature 
in  his  government  is  subservient  to  some  good  and  wise 
end.  If  our  comfort  and  safety  in  life,  be  intimately 
connected  with  the  regular  succession  of  things  by  the 
relations  usually  dt nominated  cause  and  eflfect,  it  ought 
to  be  the  matter  of  joy  to  know,  that  his  agency  is  era- 
ployed  to  produce  this  regnlar  succession,  and  that  the 
course  of  his  operations  will  not  be  suspended  but  for 
ends  the  wisest  and  the  best.  To  know  that  when  we 
take  food  it  shall  not  become  poison,  or  drink,  that  it 
shall  not  become  fire,  or,  that  when  we  are  conveyed  in  a 


118 

chaise  or  in  a  sliip,  that  the  vehicle  shall  not  dissolve  to 
atoms,  or  the  earth  lose  its  soruiity,  or  the  Ocean  its 
bouyant  power,  except  for  purposes  the  most  wise  and 
merciful,  demands  the  ejaculations  of  a  thankful  and 
a  pious  joy. 

But  as  the  natural  world  is  subservient  to  the  moral, 
his  j^ox  ernmeut  in  the  latter,  ought  to  be  still  more  tfie 
cause  of  joy.  God  identiftt's  his  people  with  himself. 
And  as  he  hath  made  all  things  for  himself,  su  all 
things,  whether  prossperous,  or  calamitous,  whether  life 
or  death — things  present  or  things  to  come  shall  work 
io^ptherftr  gjod  to  tlipm  that  love  God.  Even  the 
light  aifiiciions  of  this  life,  that  are  but  for  a  moment, 
shall  work  out  for  them  afar  more  exceeding  and  eter- 
nal weight  ofglorf/. 

The  earth  and  ail  the  abundance  of  the  isles  shoi^ld 
rejoice,  that  the  Lord  and  not  blind  fate,  or  vagrant 
chance  reigneth,  because  his  purpose  is,  that  all  their 
heathen  inhabitants  shall  be  given  to  the  Son  for  his  in- 
heritance, -and  he  will  overturn,  and  overturn  the  na- 
tions, until  all  his  pleasure  be  accomplished — Joy  to  the 
earth;  Cod  reigns. — Amen. 


Kf*XiiS3ma9tim 


liemarJi'S  concluded  from  jiage  1)0. 
In  a  written  sermon,  on  religious  iginnance,  preached 
last  January,  the  Editor  addressed  \he  following  Ian  - 
guage  to  his  audience— ^-1  fear,  that  \}^  some  of  you  were 
inteVrogated  on  the  history  of  the  jiible,  you  could 
scarcely  tell  who  lived  first,  Paul  or  Nebuchadnezzai; 
whether  the  Jewish  captivity  was  bef(ne  or  aftiM-  the 
flood;  or  whetlior  Adam  or  Jesus  Christ  died  to  save 
sinners."  This  as  we  are  variously  informed,  was  gar- 
bled from  hearsay  by  a  certain  clerical  individual,  then 
ill  this  region,  and  so  altered  in  the  carrying  as  to  sub- 
stitute Arminian  or  Metfiodist  for  "-soma  of  yoii:^^^  In 
this  counterfeit  form,  it  was  circulated  far  and  wide; 
carried  into  the  pulpit;  and  there  no  doubt  soundly  re- 
futed. And  is  if  it  were  not  enough  to  prostitute  the  mi- 
nistry, and  degradii  the  pulpit,  the  vile   slander  has   so 


119 

far  found  its  way  into  the  good  graces  of  our  censor  as 
to  obtain  a  kind  of  half  covered  currency  in  his  crude 
animadversions.  Even  charity  itself,  except  stone 
blind,  must  see,  that  the  spirit  which  can  thus  catch  such 
a  slander  as  it  flies  away  and  hold  it  a  prisoner  to  grace 
the  trophies  of  the  pulpit  and  the  press,  is  nothing  high- 
er than  a  base  bigotry,  regardless  of  truth,  and  only  in- 
tent on  exciting  sectarian  prejudices.  If  such  a  spirit 
enters  heaven,  it  must  be  because  it  is  too  ignorant  to 
know  the  turpitude  of  the  sin  of  lying.  We  now  dis- 
miss the  whole  odious  subject  and  only  add  a  few  rcr 
marks  tending  to  develope  some  of  the  features  of  Ar- 
rainianism: 

In  No.  1,  the  stricfures  represent  the  assertion,  made 
in  Christian  Preacher  No.  I,  that  Arminians  and  Cal- 
vinists,  agree  in  supposing,  that  God  chose  some  and 
passed  by,  and  did  not  choose  others — as  contrary  to 
fact,  and  denies,  that  Arminians  hold  any  such  doctrine; 
or,  admit  any  such  affinity  to  Calvinism,  That  Armi- 
nians and  Calvinists  agree  in  supposing,  that  God  chose, 
and  passed  by  for  the  same  reasons,  or  in  the  same  man- 
ner, is  indeed  not  true,  nor  is  any  such  intimation  given 
in  the  Discourse.  But  Armmianism  does  teach,  in  re- 
ality, if  not  in  so  many  words,  that  God  passes  by,  and 
does  not  choose  those  to  the  blessings  of  eternal  life, 
who  die  in  unbelief. — See  definition  of  Arminianism, 
No.  I,  p.  3. 

The  manner  in  which  our  Arminian  has  disposed  of 
the  texts — "Whom  he  did  foreknow,  he  also  did  predes- 
tinate"— Rom.  viii,  19.  ^^According  as  he  hath  chosen 
us  before  the  foundation  of  the  world*'- -Ep.  i,  4,  de- 
serves a  remark,  not  for  its  originality,  but  because  we 
may  thus  catch  the  genius  of  Arminian  exposition.  By 
the  assistance  of  Benson's  Commentary,  he  informs  ns, 
that  the  Greek  word  translated  prfdcstinate,  may  he 
converted  into  Latin  by  prius  definio.  This  is  not  objec- 
tionable. And  then  we  are  told,  that  'prius  defuiin 
means  to  define  or  describe  beforehand. 

To  thi*<  we  object.  'Ihe  first  meaning  of  the  Latin 
word  defivio  is  to  honvd  or  liw.it;  and  our  English  word 


1^0 

define  is  only  a  metaphorical  siji;nificalion  of  definio  [see 
any  Latin  Dictionary].  riius  the  text  is  evaded  by 
chans5ing  it  into  a  metaphor.  In  stricture  number  o. 
we  are  taught,  that  'Mjefoie  (lie  foundation  of  the  worhl/' 
means  the  Jewish  state— before  the  Gospel  was  preach- 
ed!! We  Jscarcely  know  what  kind  of  figure  to  denonii- 
nate  this.  Such  a  figuring  and  distorting  of  Scripture, 
ou"*ht  to  make  even  a  Socinian  blusli.  This  is  suffici- 
ent to  prove,  that  x\rminianism,  like  the  theory  of  Soci- 
nius,  shrinks  from  a  strict  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
and  supports  itself  only  by  figurative  evasions.  Armi- 
nianism  must  be  rectified  before  it  can  be  reconciled  to 
a  close  exposition  of  the  Bible. 

Though  we  think  it  is  demonstrated  in  Christian 
Preacher  No.  1,  pp.  10-13,  that  human  actions  may  be 
scripturally  predestinated,  and.  yet  free,  the  writer  in 
Strictures  No.  4  and  ;"),  without  offering  an  argument  to 
refute  our  reasoning*?,  then  befi)re  him,  gives  us  the  old 
Arminian  cant,  that  if  God  decreed  human  actions, 
they  can  not  be  free,  and  he  mufit  be  the  author  of  sin. 
See  Christian  Preacher,  No.  Ill,  pp.  55-o8,  and  also 
the  latter  part  of  No.  IV.  V\'  e  can  regard  such  asser- 
tions no  more  than  the  rattling  of  an  old  bell,  except  we 
see  them  supported  with  argument.  If  it  be  truth,  that 
is  asserted,  it  must  be  attended  with  evidence,  and 
tlierefore  ought  to  furnisii  arguments. 

If  we  must  have  more  strictures,  let  us  also  have 
more  intelligence  and  more  candor.  Ignorance  and 
falsehood  can  never  be  subservient  to  the  Christian  re- 
liffion.     She  scorns  such  aids. 

In  opposition  to  this  doctrine,  this  text  will  no  doubt  occur  to  the  minds 
of  some,  "Which  were  born  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor 
of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God,  Jno.  i.  13 — This  text  indeed  proves,  that 
regeneration  is  exclusively  the  work  of  God,  but  proves  nothing  about  its  an- 
tecedents. It  most  literally  agrees  with  the  doctrine  stated  in  Christian 
Preacher  No.  2,  pp.  42,  43 

Errata  in  this  J^^o. 

Page  07.  1st  line  in  the  seimon,  for  "is  silent"  read  "in  silent  '* 

101,  lOrh  line  from  top,  for  "Slow  to  no  act,"  read  "Slave  to  no  sect." 

103,  17th  line  from  bottom,  for  "philosophical"  read  "physical." 

Krrnta  iv  the  Inst  Ao, 

Pa.^c  7'i,  14th  line  from  bottom,  for  "meditation"  read  "mediation," 
— —  96,  I3th  line  from  bottom,  for  "17"  read  "27." 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER, 


Vol.  1.  jYOVEMBEB,  1827.  N^  6. 


THE  FALL  OF  MAJV. 

And  when  the  woman  saw  that  the  tree  was  good  for  food,  and 
that  it  was  pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one 
wise,  she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof,  and  did  eat,  and  gave  also  unto  her 
husband  with  her,  and  he  did  eat. — Gen.  iii.  6". 

What  a  sad  page  in  the  history  of  man!  Here  is  recor- 
ded the  first  breach  of  moral  obligation  ever  practised  in 
our  world.  Here  the  mound  of  obedience  was  overlea- 
ped, and  innocence  forsook  the  earth.  This  first  disobe- 
dience of  our  first  parents,  it  is  the  design  of  the  present 
discourse,  and  of  the  one  following  to  consider. 

To  regulate  our  contemplations  on  this  momentous  sub- 
ject, it  is  proposed  to  pursue  the  following  questions: 

/.  IIoiv  did  man  as  a  perfect  being  fall  into  trans- 
g7^ession? 

11.  Into  what  estate  did  the  fall  bring  mankind? 

IIL  Did  God  foreknow  and  decree  the  fall  of  man? 
— and 

IV,  How  is  the  fall  of  man  consistent  with  the  idea 
of  the  best  possible  system? 

I.  How  did  man  as  a  perfect  being  fall  into  trans- 
gression? 

As  in  physics,  so  in  theology,  no  theories  ought  to  be 
admitted,  but  such  as  are  founded  on  facts.  To  answer 
this  question  theoretically,  the  following  facts  are  to  be 
considered, 

1.  The  particulars  in  which  manh  original  perfection 
consisted; 

2.  The  law  given  him  as  suited  to  this  perfection;  and 

3.  The  scriptural  narrative  of  his  temptation  and 
fall.     We  consider, 

1 .  The  particulars  in  ivhich  man^s  origijial  perfect 
tion  co7isisted. 

Perfection  in  creatures  is  only  a  relative  term.  Ab- 
solute perfection  is  exclusively  the  prerogative  of  Deity. 


122 

The  perfection  of  a  creature  consists  in  an  exact  adapta- 
tion to  that  place  in  the  universe,  in  which  Infinite  wis- 
dom lias  located  him,  and  to  that  end  for  which  Almigh- 
ty power  created  him. 

The  perfection  of  our  first  parents,  consisted  in  the 
entire  fitness  of  their  moral  and  physical  natures  to  that 
sphere  in  the  system  of  univ  ersal  being,  in  which  they 
moved  whilst  the  unseduced  inhabitants  of  Paradise. 

Man  appears  to  be  the  link,  which  unites  the  harmonies 
of  the  material  and  the  spiritual  worlds.  As  Adam  was 
a  compound  of  the  spiritual  and  the  animal  creations,  and 
as  the  Benificent  Creator  constituted  him  for  the  enjoy- 
ment of  happiness  drawn  from  objects  in  both  kingdoms, 
he  had  pnnciples  of  nature  precisely  adapted  to  those 
particular  kinds  of  enjoyment.  As  in  the  cup  of  crea- 
tion God  mingled  almost  an  infinite  variety  of  flavours — 
rancids,  sweets,  and  tarts, — man  was  endowed  with  pow- 
ers and  appetites  to  relish  their  tastes,  and  enjoy  their 
fragrance.  As  he  projected  the  landscape,  and  spread 
the  lawn,  and  painted  the  firmament,  man  was  so  formed, 
as  to  derive  pleasure  from  the  objects  of  beauty  and  gran- 
deur. And  as  he  opened  before  him  the  immense,  va- 
ried, and  magniriccnt  volume  of  creation,  so  he  endowed 
him,  not  only  with  the  power  of  becoming  wise,  but  al- 
so with  the  desire  of  wisdom.  And  so  also,  as  he  was 
designed  by  his  Creator  to  be  a  rational  and  immortal  be- 
ing, and  subject  to  law,  he  was  endued  with  the  princi- 
ples of  moral  existence.  As  relations  really  exist  which 
involve  the  distinctions  of  moral  right  and  wrong,  a  mo- 
ral discernment  to  apprehend  these  relations,  and  recog- 
nize these  distinctions,  was  given  him  as  one  of  the  in- 
dispensable qualifications  for  obedience.  But  as  a  mere 
uninterested  perception  of  moral  distinction,  would  not  be 
sufiicient  to  ensure  obedience,  man  was  formed  with  a 
moral  sense  to  feel  the  pleasures  of  approbation  when  he 
obeyed,  and  the  stings  of  remorse  when  he  transgressed. 
And  finally,  as  in  the  economy  of  the  moral  system,  man 
was  to  have  obedience  and  life,  and  disobedience  and 
death,  placed  before  him  as  the  objects  of  his  election, 
lie  was  endued  with  the  power  of  \  olition  for  the  purpo- 
ses of  choice. 


123 

These  were  the  constitutional  principles  of  human  na- 
ture^ and  of  course  essential  to  man  as  such.  But  to  re- 
gulate these  principles,  and  direct  them  to  their  proper 
end,  a  conformity  to  the  image  of  God  as  adventitious 
principle  inhabited  the  soul.  For  the  existence  and  in- 
habitation of  this  principle  in  the  souls  of  our  first  pa- 
rents, we  have  the  express  testimony  of  God's  word:  God 
created  man  in  his  own  IMAGE ^  in  the  IMAGE  of 
God  created  he  him,  male  and  female  created  he  them. 
And  that  it  was  an  adventitious,  and  not  an  essential  prin- 
ciple  of  human  nature,  is  demonstrated  by  the  declara- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost:  The  new  man — is  BEJVE  W- 
ED  in  knowledge  after  the  IMAGE  of  him  that  crea- 
ted him. "^  Here  the  man  is  reported  as  7^e72eived  ^fter 
the  i?nage  of  God:  and  if  so,  he  must  have  fallen  from  that 
image;  and  conformity  to  it  must  therefore  have  been  an 
adventitious  principle,  and  not  essential  to  human  nature 
as  such. 

To  avoid  mistakes  on  this  very  important  subject,  it  is 
proper  to  enquire,  in  what  this  conformity  to  the  image 
of  God  consisted.  The  testimony  of  the  Spirit  is,  that, 
the  new  man — is  reneived  in  KKOWLEBGE  after 
the  IMAGE  of  him  that  created  him,^  and  after  GOD 
is  created  in  RIGHTEOUSA^ESS  cmd  true  HOLI- 
A^ESS.  t  This  renewal  of  fallen  man,  can  be  neither  more 
nor  less,  than  a  reinstatement  of  that  conformity  to  the 
image  of  God,  lost  by  our  fwst  parents  in  the  fall.  Then 
according  to  these  Scriptures  this  conformity  to  the  im- 
age of  God  consisted  partly  in  knowledge. — Truth,  and 
nothing  but  truth,  was  the  object  of  man's  contempla- 
tion whilst,  in  rectitude,  he  inhabited  his  terrestial  hea- 
ven. And  truth  placed  constantly  before  him  the  per- 
fections of  God.  The  changeful  seasons  in  the  year  pro- 
claimed to  him  but  the  varied  Deity.  In  the  diversity 
of  flavours,  that  in  food,  delighted  his  taste;  in  the  fra- 
grance wafted  by  the  winds  from  the  flowers  of  Eden; 
in  the  flocks  that  covered  the  verdant  plains;  in  the 
hymns  of  the  winged  songsters  of  the  grove;  in  the  gran 


^Colossians  iii.  18.     fEph.  iv.  24. 


124 

4eur  of  the  firmament,  now  illuminated  by  the  sun^  and 
again  spangled  by  the  stars; — in  the  whole  surrounding 
visible  creation;  but  above  all,  in  the  inhabitation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  his  soul^  and  in  the  audible  and  visible  ma- 
nifestations of  the  divine  presence,  his  senses,  and  eve- 
ry power  of  his  mind,  were  exercised  on  the  truth  of  his 
Creators  perfections.  And  these  truths  conveyed  to  his 
mind  through  the  appropriate  avenues,  and  like  so  many 
rays  of  light  converged  to  a  common  point,  enkindled  that 
fire  of  celestial  love,  which  becoming  the  ruling  princi- 
ple imparted  light,  heat,  and  motion  to  the  physical  and 
moral  powers  of  the  whole  man.  God  is  love,  and  where 
his  perfections  are  distinctly  seen  and  felt,  they  produce 
a  reaction  of  love.  Our  first  parents  viewed  God  in  e- 
very  object  that  addressed  their  understanding,  and 
hence  their  supreme  affection  conveyed  through  the  ob- 
jects of  creation,  as  through  a  channel,  terminated  on 
the  Creator.  And  as  man  is  so  constituted,  that  all  the 
principles  of  his  nature,  are  subordinate  to  the  ruling  pas- 
sion, all  the  natural  and  moral  powers  of  our  first  parents, 
operated  under  the  immediate  controul  of  Supreme  af- 
fection to  the  Author  of  their  being.  And  as  this  em- 
ployment of  the  human  principles,  is  just  that  for  which 
man  is  made,  under  this  guidance,  they  operated  each 
one  in  its  proper  sphere,  without  any  jarring  in  their 
interests,  or  any  clashing  in  their  movements.  As  the 
wheels  of  a  well  regulated  machine,  one  more  and  ano- 
ther less  important  as  a  part,  yet  the  less  equally  essen- 
tial with  the  greater  to  the  complete  whole,  all  turning 
around  in  harmonious  subordination,  the  one  to  the  o- 
ther,  and  the  whole  to  the  power  that  commimicates  mo- 
tion; so  all  the  principles  of  human  nature,  in  our  first 
parents,  while  innocent,  acting  in  subordination,  the  low- 
er to  the  higher,  harmoniously  moved  onwards  in  the 
course  of  obedience  to  supreme  love  of  God,  which  o- 
perated  as  a  power  imparting  motion  to  the  whole:  Or, 
to  use  another  simile,  as  the  less  streams  in  the  wide  val- 
ley of  Western  America,  all,  with  one  consent,  flow  into 
the  Great  Mississippi,  and  permit  their  waters  to  be 
torne  in  his  majestic  channel  towards  the  Ocean,  with- 


125 

out  one  seeking  a  private  course  for  itself,  so  every  prin- 
ciple of  human  nature  in  unfallen  man,  as  if  attracted 
with  the  greater  principle  of  love  to  the  Creator,  flowed 
into  its  channel,  and  was  borne  onwards  by  its  living 
current  towards  that  Ocean   of  love,  that  moves  in  the 
bosom  of  God.     And  thus,  love   is  the  fulfilling  of  the 
law.     And  hence,  as  whatever  man  knew,  was  an  ema- 
nation of  God's  perfections,  and  was  surveyed  by  him  as 
such,  and  was  therefore  truth,  the  very  essence  of  real 
knowledge  producing  love  in  the  heart  to  God,  such  as 
to  sway  every  appetite,  passion,  and  power,  in  the  most 
harmonious  obedience  to  the  Maker's  law,  his  original 
conformity  to  the  image  of  God,  is  said  to   consist  in 
knoivledge.     As  in  this  state,  man  was  obedient  to  his 
God;  was  under  the  condemnation  of  no  law;  and  was 
therefore  accountel  legally  righteous,  this  conformity  to 
the  divine  Image  may  be  said  to  have  consisted  in  righ- 
teousness.    So  also,  as  in  the  innocence  of  Paradise,  the 
human  powers  were  devoted  to  the  very  purpose  to 
which  they  were  appropriated  by  their  Maker;  were 
undefiled  by  any  perversion  from  their  proper  employ- 
ment; and  were  therefore,  morally  pure,  man's  original 
correspondence  to  the  divine  likeness,  is  said  to  be  in 
true  holiness.     Thus  man  was  originally  created  after 
the  image  of  God  in  knowledge,  righteousness,  and  true 
holiness.     From  this  survey  of  the  particulars  in  which 
man's  perfection  consisted^  we  proceed  to  examine, 
2.    The  law  given  him  as  suited  to  this  per feetion, 
God  is  the  first  Cause,  and  his  perfect  nature  is  the 
foundation  of  all  created  beings,  and  of  all  the  relations, 
that  arise  out  of  the  existence  of  created  beings.     While 
moral  beings  abide  in  the  rectitude,  in  which  they  are 
originally  placed  by  the  Infinite  Creator,  their  character 
and  relations  correspond  with  the  perfection,  or  the  im- 
age of  his  nature,  just  as  the  figure  made  on  the  pliant 
wax  with   the  seal  with  which  it   is  impressed.     As 
man's  original  perfection  consisted  in  a  correspondence 
with  the  moral  attributes  of  Deity,  so  the  law  adapted  to 
his  primeval  perfection,  and  given  him  for  a  guide,  is 
an  image  or  a  picture  of  those  attributes  so  far  as  they 


126 

relate  to  man.  As  God  is  a  Sovereign,  law  must  be  gi- 
ven to  his  creature  man  as  an  image  of  that  Sovereignty: 
as  he  is  d^just  Sovereign,  his  law  given  to  the  creature 
as  a  picture  of  his  justice,  must  be  d^just  law:  and  as  he  is 
a  icooG?  Sovereign,  his  law  given  to  Adam  as  a  transcript  of 
his  goodness,  must  be  a  good  law.  To  have  given  no 
law  would  have  been  a  denial  of  his  Sovereignty;  to  have 
given  any  but  a  just  and  good  law,  would  have  been  a  re- 
linquishment of  his  justiceand  his  goodness.  And  hence, 
while  all  the  points  of  obedience  to  which  man's  nature  ex- 
tended, and  which  it  covered,  were  almost  as  numerous 
as  the  motions  of  his  body,  and  the  operations  of  his  mind, 
(xod  as  a  just,  and  a  good  Lawgiver,  made  that  command 
which  was  ordained  to  life,  and  which  therefore,  had  it 
been  kept,  would  have  confirmed  him  in  a  state  of  spi- 
ritual life,  consist  in  one  single  point  of  obedience- 
While  he  kept  that  one  precept,  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelt 
in  his  heart,  and  illuminated  his  mind  to  behold  his  eve- 
ry duty,  and  by  teaching  him  that  he  experienced  the 
goodness  of  God  in  every  object  of  both  sense  and  rea- 
son, he  ca^used  his  alfections  to  centre  on  his  Creator  and 
his  King.  But  the  conditions  of  his  probationary  state, 
were  such,  that  in  case  of  disobedience  of  the  command: 
of  the  treeoftheknoiQledge  of  good  and  evil y  thou  shall  not 
eat,  this  holy  inhabitant  would  forsake  his  soul,  remove 
from  his  mind  all  the  divine  illumination,  which  enkin- 
dled in  his  bosom  that  love  to  God  that  subjected  all  his 
active  powers  to  the  service  of  the  Maker,  and  would 
leave  all  the  principles  of  the  man  to  moral  darkness^ 
except  so  far  as  the  perfections  of  God,  and  the  relations 
existing  between  the  creature  and  the  Creator,  and  the 
duties  arising  out  of  those  relations  glimmered  upon  the 
eye  of  his  understanding  through  tbc  deep  glooms  of  spi- 
ritual death.  This  is  considered  to  be  the  commence- 
ment of  the  penalty  contained  in  the  threatening:  in  the 
day  thou  eatrst  thereof  thou  sJuilt  surely  die. 

Thus  by  the  law  of  Pi«radise,  which  may  be  taken  as 
the  whole  moral  law  e];itomized,  that  obedience  which 
secured  man's  title  to  life,  or  plunged  him  in  death,  was 
reduced  to  a  single  prohibiting  precept,  forbidding  only 


127 

one  single  act:  of  every  tree  of  the  garden  thou  mayst 
freely  eat^  hut  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil^  thou  shall  not  eat  of  it^  for  in  the  day  that  thou 
eatest  thereof  thou  shall  surely  die.  This  single  prohi- 
bition however,  laid  restrictions  on  three  principles  of 
human  nature:  the  desire  of  appetite  for  that  which  is 
good  for  food;  the  desire  of  taste  for  whatever  is  pleasant 
to  the  eyes;  and  the  desire  of  wisdom,  which  delights  in 
whatever  is  supposed  to  make  one  wise.  None  of  these 
were  permitted  to  be  indulged  by  any  interference  with 
the  fruit  of  the  forbidden  tree.  And  so  long  as  our  first 
parents  were  firm  in  the  belief,  that  the  threatened  death 
would  certainly  be  the  penalty  of  transgression,  they  re- 
mained in  obedience;  but  eventually,  we  find  the  histo- 
ry of  their  temptation  and  disobedience,  and  it  is  propo- 
sed to  consider 

3.  The  scriptural  narrative  of  their  temptation  and 
fall. 

It  is  comprised  in  the  following  words:  And  he  [the 
serpent]  said  unto  the  woman^  Yea  hath  God  said,  ye 
shall  not  eat  of  every  tree  of  the  garden?  And  the  wo- 
man said  unto  the  serpent,  We  may  eat  of  the  fruit  of 
the  trees  of  the  garden,  hut  of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  ivhich 
is  in  the  midst  of  the  garden,  God  hath  said,  ye  shall 
not  eat  of  it,  neither  shall  ye  touch  it,  lest  ye  die.  And 
the  serpent  said  unto  the  woman,  ye  shall  not  surely  die. 
For  God  doth  knoiu  that  in  the  day  ye  eat  thereof,  then 
your  eyes  shall  be  opened,  and  ye  shall  be  as  Gods  know- 
ing good  and  evil. 

From  this  narrative  we  learn,  that  the  Tempter  made 
his  first  attack  upon  the  understanding  of  our  first  pa- 
rents. Contradicting  the  threatening  of  the  Sovereign 
Lawgiver,  he  said,  ye  shall  not  surely  die,  and  repre- 
sents the  divine  prohibition  as  an  invidious  injunction  to 
prevent  .them  from  participating  in  the  divine  Wis- 
dom: For  God  doth  know,  said  the  Tempter,  that  in 
the  day  that  ye  eat  thereof  your  eyes  shall  be  opened  and 
ye  shall  be  as  gods  knowing  good  and  evil.     Our  first 

"See  the  note  at  the  end  of  the  sermon. 


128 

mother  gave  credence  to  the  falsehood;  she  surveyed  the 
fruit,  viewed  it  as  good  for  food,  pleasant  to  the  eyes^ 
and  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise.  Thus  her  under- 
standing led  astray  from  contemplating  the  truth  of  her 
Maker,  and  filled  with  falsehood  instead  of  truth — with 
darkness  instead  of  light — could  no  longer  converge 
the  rays  of  divine  knowledge  so  as  to  enkindle  in  her  bo- 
som that  heavenly  love,  which  only  can  give  life,  direc- 
tion, and  harmonious  motion  to  all  the  principles  of  her 
nature,  in  the  course  of  holy  obedience.  The  Holy 
Ghost  ceased  to  inhabit  her  soul,  as  soon  as  the  lie  eclip- 
sed the  light  of  her  understanding:  the  love  of  God  for- 
sook her  heart;  and  the  inferior  principles  of  animal  ap- 
petite and  passion,  now  deserted  by  the  higher — the 
light  of  truth  and  the  love  of  God — and  left  in  a  state  of 
darkness  and  anarchy,  acting  no  longer  either  in  subor- 
dination or  in  concert,  arose,  each  to  assert  its  individual 
claims,  and  separate  gratifications.  We  find,  that  after 
the  mind  became  blinded  by  falsehood,  the  appetite  for 
food,  the  desire  of  that  which  is  pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and 
the  principle  that  aspires  to  wisdom,  no  longer,  as  be- 
fore, operated  in  obedience  to  the  knowledge  and  the  love 
of  God  in  seeking  their  object  in  subordination  to  higher 
objects;  but  sought  their  individual  enjoyment  as  the  su- 
preme end  of  their  action.  For  when  the  woman  saw 
that  the  tree  w\as  good  for  FOOD,  and  that  it  was  PLEA- 
SANT to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one 
WISE,  she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof  and  did  eat,  and  gave- 
to  her  husl)and  with  her,  and  he  did  eat.  Her  under- 
standing that  before,  had  constantly  contemplated  the 
divine  perfections,  either  directly,  in  immediate  revela- 
tion, or  indirectly,  in  the  beamings  of  their  glory  through 
the  medium  of  the  Creators  works,  and  the  affections, 
that  before  centred  on  Infinite  excellence,  now  all  went 
astray;  the  understanding  first,  and  the  inferior  princi- 
ples in  the  train.  No  sooner  had  truth  forsaken  the 
mind,  than  the  passions  and  appetites  rushed  to  seek  their 
own  individual  enjoyment,  regardless  of  any  higher  end, 
and  employed  the  understanding,  only  to  obtain  the  ob- 
jects of  their  gratification. 


129- 

With  these  facts  before  us,  we  can  account  for  the  fall 
of  man  without  supposing,  that  God  implanted  in  him  a- 
ny  wicked  principles,  or  loaded  him  with  the  chains  of  a 
fatal  necessity.  The  simple  conclusion  from  these  facts 
is,  that  though  the  knowledge  of  our  first  parents  even  in 
Paradise,  was  finite,  yet  what  they  had,  being  divine 
truth,  and  therefore,  real  knowledge,  so  affected  their 
minds,  as  to  direct  the  current  of  their  affections  towards 
the  Creator,  and  thus  to  bring  all  the  inferior  principles  of 
the  man  into  his  service;  but  that  in  the  temptation  the  un- 
derstanding, the  governing  power,  blinded  by  falsehood, 
ceased  to  be  a  guide  in  the  way  of  duty,  the  moral  sense, 
the  volitions,  and  all  the  inferior  principles,  went  astray 
from  God,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  olfended  by  man's  trans- 
gression, forsook  his  soul,  and  thus  conformity  to  the  im^ 
age  of  the  Maker  was  lost. 

And  if  this  conclusion  be  sustained  by  the  facts  as  le- 
gitimate, then  man\  liability  to  transgression  resulted 
from  the  finite  nature  of  his  intellect  as  a  creature,  and 
his  natural  libei^y  as  a  moral  agent. 

The  facts  and  principles  employed  in  explaining  the 
first  human  transgression,  if  adopted  will  conduct  us  to, 
at  least,  a  plausible  solution  of  the  apostacy  of  the  angels 
who  kept  not  their  first  estate.  It  cannot  be  denied,  that 
Satan's  understanding  is  finite.  And  it  appears  equal- 
ly  plain,  that  when  committing  his  first  sin,  he  was  not 
fully  convinced,  that  all  the  consequences  probably 
threatened  as  the  penalty  of  disobedience,  would  on  his 
transgression,  be  inevitably  executed;  because  no  ra- 
tional mind  can  conceive  how  a  holy .  being  can  possibly 
sin,  knowing  at  the  same  time,  that  endless  ruin  will  ine- 
vitably, and  immediately  follow. 

It  must  also  be  conceded,  that  in  his  original  and  un- 
fallen  state,  he  possessed  like  man,  constitutional  desires 
which,  while  under  the  controul  of  an  understanding, 
properly  regulated  and  employed,  were  subservient  to 
the  end  of  his  creation.  As  pride  is  represented  by  the 
Apostle  as  the  condemnation  of  the  Devil,  it  is  reasona- 
ble to  infer,  that  among  his  original  desires  was  the  love 

vr 


130 

of  rank,  a  principle  necessary  when  properly  regulated, 
as  a  chain  to  bind  every  creature  to  his  appropriate 
sphere  in  the  order  of  creation.  Only  imagine,  that 
with  his  finite  intellect,  Satan  should  erroneously  judge, 
that  by  violating  some  command  of  his  Sovereign,  he 
might  elevate  himself  to  a  higher  grade  in  existence, 
than  that  which  he  then  occupied,  or  even  to  the  Supre- 
macy of  the  universe;  and  then,  this  supposed  possibili- 
ty, viewed  by  his  mind  as  a  matter  of  fact,  would  prove 
as  much  a  temptation  to  him,  as  did  the  forbidden  fruit 
to  Adam  in  Paradise.  Now  only  suppose,  that  the  un- 
derstanding, when  thus  perverted  from  truth  and  recti- 
tude, would  cease  to  confine  the  love  of  rank  to  the  pro- 
per sphere;  and  this  desire  should  rush  unrestrained  by 
any  governing  principle  to  seek  its  gratification;  and  that 
the  understanding,  which  was  formerly  employed  in  con- 
trouling  it,  should  now  become  only  the  minister  of  its 
lawless  indulgence;  and  thus  we  can  account  for  the  de- 
scent of  Lucifer  with  all  his  host  of  morning  stars  from 
their  high  abodes.  If  this  theory  be  correct,  the  fact, 
that  the  most  exalted  created  intellect  is  liable  to  err  in 
judgment,  is  sufficient  to  explain  the  introduction  of  sin 
into  the  universe. 

It  may  however  be  asked  by  way  of  objection  to  this 
theory,  how  is  acreature  accountable  for  an  error  in  judg- 
ment? Theologians  who  make  this  objection,  appear  to 
suppose,  that  they  have  fully  explained  accountability, 
when  they  have  traced  sin  to  the  exercise  of  voli- 
tion w^hence  it  immediately  arises.  But  unfortunately, 
tliey  can  give  no  more  reason  why  a  man  is  accountable 
for  an  error  in  volition,  than  for  an  error  in  undemtan 
ding.  To  answer  such  an  objection  it  is  sufficient  to  re- 
tort  the  question,  and  ask,  how  is  a  creature  more  culpa- 
ble for  erring  in  cl^oice,  than  in  understanding?  To  place 
the  contrast  in  a  clear  light:  the  amount  of  our  theory 
is,  some  finite  beings  are  liable  to  judge  wrong:  the 
amount  of  his  is,  some  finite  beings  are  liable  to  choose 
wrong.  Asa  being  infinite  and  absolutely  perfect,  is  ex- 
empt from  both  these  liabilities,  on  either  supposition 
the  liability  must  result  from  the  imperfection  of  a  crea- 


131 

ted  and  finite  nature.  But  as  such  a  nature  creates  its 
own  liabilities  no  more  in  the  one  case,  than  in  the  other, 
how  is  the  creature  acountable  for  sin,  the  result  of  that 
liability  in  the  one  case,  any  more  than  in  the  other? 
This  query  ought  to  be  resolved,  before  the  objection  is 
urged  against  our  theory.  The  soul  is  an  indivisi- 
ble unit,  and  is  not  separated  into  the  different  compart- 
ments of  will  and  understanding.  The  whole  soul  wills^ 
and  the  whole  soul  understands;  and  in  cases  of  moral  a- 
gency,  it  believes  what  it  chooses,  and  chooses  what  it 
believes.  It  is  admitted  that  no  act  is  culpable  but  that 
which  is  voluntary;  but  it  is  apprehended  that  it  was 
fairly  put  to  the  choice  of  our  first  parents,  whether  to 
believe  God  or  the  Tempter;  and  to  the  fallen  angels 
while  in  a  state  of  obedience  and  glory,  whether  to  be- 
lieve the  declaration  of  their  Maker,  or  the  deductions 
of  their  own  finite  and  fallible  intellects. 

Though  obedience,  and  disobedience,  were  presented 
to  unfallen  man,  and  unfallen  angels,  as  objects  of  choice; 
yet  had  there  been  no  error  in  intellect,  there  could  have 
been,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  no  inducement  to  a  holy  be- 
ing to  choose  disobedience.  Whilst  our  first  parents  be- 
lieved, that  if  they  ate  the  forbidden  fruit,  they  should 
certainly  die,  in  the  meaning  of  the  threatening,  they  ap- 
pear not  to  have  indulged  the  least  inclination  to  diso- 
bey; but  so  soon  as  doubts  began  to  scatter  mists  over 
their  minds,  then  inducements  to  disobedience,  began  to 
operate  successfully  upon  their  powers  of  choice.  Then, 
L  but  not  till  then,  did  they  begin  to  survey  the  guarded, 
^^tre6  as  good  for  food,  pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to 
he  desired  to  make  one  ivise.  So  that  if  we  should  admit, 
that  the  essence  of  accountability  consists  in  error  of 
choice  only,  still  it  is  true,  that  a  liability  to  err  in  judg- 
ment, is  sufficient  to  explain  the  introduction  of  sin  into 
the  moral  universe.  Without  a  mistake  in  the  under- 
standing, there  could  be  no  inducement  to  error  in 
choice.  But  since  it  is  admitted  by  all  that  liability  to 
error,  whether  in  understanding,  or  volition  is  morally 
impossible  in  an  infinite,  and  absolutely  perfect  being,  it 
must  result  from  the  imperfection  of  a  created  and  finite 


132 

intellect.  And  if  so,  how  is  such  a  being  justly  held  ac- 
countable  for  the  results  of  liabilities,  which  he  had  no 
choice  in  identifying  with  his  nature?  He  does  dot  cre- 
ate his  own  liabilities  either  to  choose  wrong  or  to  judge 
wrong.  Why  then  is  he  to  blame,  either  for  error  in 
judgment,  or  for  error  in  choice? 

The  principal  difficulty  attending  this  query,  arises 
from  the  common  opinion  in  theological  phihsophy, 
which  supposes  that  Deity,  had  he  chosen,  might  have 
created  all  the  subjects  of  his  moral  kingdom  so  perfect, 
as  to  be  above  all  liabilities  to  sin;  that  he  chose  how- 
ever not  to  create  all  of  them  exempt  from  these  wofal 
liabilities;  but  to  form  some  of  them  with  such  imper- 
fections as  would  certainly  be  the  antecedents  to  all  the 
sin,  ever  perpetrated  within  the  space  and  duration  of 
the  moral  universe;  which  is  only  saying  in  other  vvords, 
that  God  actually  preferred  that  some  men  and  an- 
gels should  eventually  be  sinners,  and  not  always  re~ 
main  holy.  Now  since  it  is  universally  acknowledged, 
that  a  perfect  God  will  and  can  not  prefer  wrong  to 
right,  on  this  hypothesis,  it  is  indeed  a  hopeless  task  to 
arrive  at  any  thing  but  confusion  and  contradiction. — 
And  hence  to  preach  on  the  subject,  is  in  many  places 
a  thankless  and  odious  performance.  But  if  we  dismiss 
this  philosophy,  and  suppose,  that  the  foundation  of  all 
righteousness  is  the  nature  of  Deity,  and  the  rule  of  all 
righteousness  his  will;  and  believe  his  word  when  he  de- 
clares sin  to  be  the  abominable  thing  which  he  hates; 
and  that  though  he  has  chosen  a  system  of  moral  being 
in  which  he  has  decreed  to  suffer  a  certain  amount  of  sin 
as  its  foreknown  imperfection  as  a  creature;  yet,  that  he 
has  selected  that  system  in  which  there  is  the  least  pos- 
sible evil,  and  that  his  nature  and  his  will,  secret  and 
revealed,  nothing  other  but  the  expression  of  his  nature, 
absolutely  prefers  righteousness  to  sin  in  all  his  moral 
subjects,  and  then  we  can  rationally  explain  the  accoun- 
tability of  men  and  angels. 

The  infinitely  just  and  good  nature  of  God  requires, 
that  there  should  be  obedience  to  his  will,  and  that  those 
who  depart  from  it  should  be  unhappy.     This  require- 


133 

ment  is  as  unchangeable  as  tlie  divine  existence.  Diso- 
bedience therefore  is  in  itself  wrong,  because  contrary 
to  the  righteous  nature  of  God,  expressed  in  his  will; 
and  is  attended  with  misery,  because  according  to  the 
perfections  of  Deity  the  former  involves  the  latter. 

God^s  nature  is  in  itself  righteous  and  gocd;  and  in 
the  creature  eonformity  to  that  nature  is  in  itself  righ- 
teousness and  happiness;  and  the  contrary  unrighteous- 
ness and  misery.  This  it  is  apprehended  is  the  origin 
of  all  moral  distinctions. 

Adam  then  was  to  blame  because  he  believed  and 
chose  that  which  was  forbidden  by  the  divine  nature,  as 
expressed  by  the  divine  will  in  the  law  of  Paradise,  and 
the  same  principle  is  applicable  to  all  other  trans- 
gressors. Having  thus  endeavoured  to  account  for 
man's  first  transgression  it  is  proposed  to  enquire, 

II.   hito  what  estate  did  the  fall  bring  mankind? 

In  considering  this  question,  it  will  be  enquired /r*^ 
Into  what  estate  did  the  fall  bring  Mam?  and  secondly , 
Into  what  estate  did  the  fall  bring  his  posterity? 

1 .  Into  what  estate  did  the  fall  bring  Mam? 

Since  the  veracity  of  God  was  pledged  by  the  condi- 
tions of  the  law  of  Paradise  to  inflict  death  on  our  first 
parents,  on  the  very  day  in  which  they  would  violate 
the  great  probationary  mandate,  ^^Ofthe  tree  of  the  know- 
ledge of  good  and  evil  thou  shalt  not  eat,''  it  is  reasona- 
ble to  infer,  that  when  violating  the  command  they  took 
and  ate,  the  God  of  truth  executed  the  penalty  upon  the 
transgressors,  precisely  in  the  sense  in  which  it  was 
threatened.  To  ascertain  the  penalty  of  this  first  hu- 
man transgression,  contained  in  the  threatening,  thou 
shall  surely  die,  it  is  requisite  to  examine  the  scriptural 
import  of  the  word  death. 

Death  is  in  Scripture  sometimes  employed  to  de- 
note a  separation  of  soul  and  body  from  God's  favour  in 
this  life.  In  allusion  to  this  state  it  is  said,  '^you  hathl 
he  quickened  that  were  DEAD  in  trespasses  and  in 
sins.''  It  also  signifies  the  separation  of  the  soul  from 
the  body.  In  reference  to  this  meaning  it  is  written, 
to  DIE  is  gain.     And  finally  it  means  a  perpetual  sepa- 


134 

ration  of  the  whole  man  from  God's  heavenly  presence 
and  glory  to  be  tormented  forever  with  the  Devil  and 
his  angels.  This  is  the  signification  where  it  is  recor- 
ded, Hq  that  overcometh  shall  not  be  hurt  of  the  second 
DEATH, 

Thus  threefold  death^  spiritual^  temporal,  and  eter- 
nal, is  considered  as  involved  in  the  threatening,  and  in 
principle  all  resolvable  into  death  spiritual^  commenced 
in  our  first  parents  as  soon  as  they  sinned. 

When  they  sinned,  the  Holy  Spirit  relinquished  their 
souls  as  his  earthly  habitation.  This  influence,  the  pow- 
er which  regulated  the  machinery  of  the  human  consti- 
tution, fled  from  the  soul,  and  all  the  principles  of  the 
man,  like  the  dillerent  parts  of  a  complicated  engine, 
when  deserted  by  the  force  which  regulates  and  con- 
trouls  them,  clashed  with  each  others  movements,  and 
dashing  one  against  another,  became  a  confused  mass  of 
warring  principles  with  no  rule  of  action,  but  the  blind 
impetus  of  appetite  and  passion.  The  spiritual  know- 
ledge, which  once  like  the  light  of  heaven  shone  upon 
the  mind,  and  melted  the  soul,  until  it  flowed  like  a 
river  towiirds  the  Infinite  Ocean  of  Love,  and  moving 
onwards  in  its  course  drew  every  principle  of  human  na- 
ture to  its  channel  as  a  tributary  stream,  was  withdrawn; 
the  mind  left  in  a  state  of  dark  and  dreary  winter;  the 
current  of  heavenly  afl'ection  congealed;  and  the  pas- 
sions and  appetites,  all  tlie  inferior  principles,  deprived 
of  the  natural  outlet  for  their  flowings,  rising  over  their 
hanks,  thwarted  each  others  way,  and  inundated  the 
fair  world  of  humanity  with  disorder  and  ruin.  This 
is  conceived  to  be  the  nature  of  spiritual  death,  into 
which  man  was  brought  by  the  fall,  and  which  carried 
natural  d'jath  as  a  conse(pience  in  its  bosom. 

Some  indeed  suppose,  that  natural  death  is  not  at  ali 
one  of  the  consequences  of  sin,  but  that  according  to 
the  analogy  of  creation  around  us,  man  in  his  original 
constitution,  even  while  an  inhabitant  of  Paradise,  was 
subject  to  death;  and  that  natural  death  may  be  consi- 
dered as  a  blessing.  It  is  julmitted,  that  for  the  saint 
who  is  ripe  for  heaven^  to  die  is  i^ain:  but  this  gain  is 


135 

believed  not  to  result  from  the  nature  of  death;  but  from 
the  conquest  which  the  believer  through  the  Author  of 
his  salvation,  obtains  over  this  stern  devourer.  But  if 
death  be  in  itself  a  blessing,  why  is  it  employed  in  the 
Scriptures  as  a  figure  to  represent  disagreeable  scenes? 
Yea^  says  the  Psalmist,  though  I  walk  through  the  val- 
ley of  the  shadow  of  death,  I  ivillfear  no  eviUfor  thou 
art  with  me,  and  thy  rod  and  staff,  they  comfort  me. 
Here  the  valley  of  the  shadow  of  death,  is  generally  un- 
derstood to  mean  afflictions  and  sorrows.  If  death  be 
in  itself  really  a  good,  why  should  it  be  employed  in 
the  Scriptures,  to  paint  the  gloomy  climax  of  the  most 
disastrous  scenery?  Why  do  they  constantly  allude  to 
our  dissolution  as  a  most  painful  and  mournful  event? 
Why  is  death  the  king  of  terrors?  It  is  said,  that  the 
event  of  death,  which  to  innocent  man  would  have  been, 
but  a  delightful  repose,  is  made  terrific,  because  man 
has  become  a  sinner,  and  sin  has  given  it  a  sting? — But 
why  then — since  it  conducts  us  beyond  a  boundary 
whence  no  traveller  returns  to  render  an  account  of  its 
pains  or  its  pleasures — why  do  not  the  Scriptures  some- 
where drop  us  some  intimation,  that  death  was  designed 
as  one  of  the  blessings  that  should  attend  man  in  his  ori- 
ginal purity?  The  opinion  is  perfectly  gratuitous,  with- 
out a  shadow  of  countenance  from  the  Bible,  which 
how^ever  represents  without  any  qualification  the  wages 
of  sin  to  be  death.  It  is  most  reasonable,  that  spiritual 
death  should  be  attended  with  death  temporal  as  a  con- 
sequence. The  power  that  controuled  and  harmonized 
the  principles  of  human  nature  having  abandoned  his 
once  wonted  abode,  unrestrained  they  encroach  on 
each  other's  boundaries.  And  not  rivers  overleaping 
their  native  banks,  and  forcing  their  way  through  fertile 
plains  and  populous  cities;  not  Ocean  rolling  his  moun- 
tanous  floods  over  the  continents  that  encircle  his 
shores,  or  tossing  his  inhabitants  from  the  deeps  of  his 
bosom  to  dwell  on  parched  plains  and  burning  mountains; 
nor  earth  plunging  her  children  to  become  the  tenants 
of  the  cold  and  dark  caves  of  the  great  deep,  exhibit  a 
scene  of  greater  confusion,  than  that  produced  by  spi 


136 

ritual  death  on  man's  constitution, — Now  if  the  na- 
tive tendency  of  disorder  is  dissolution,  it  is  nothing 
marvellous,  that  spiritual  death  produces  the  dissolution 
of  the  body.  Although  the  eiiects  of  our  jnoral  over 
our  physical  nature,  are  not  always  obvious,  yet  the  in- 
ordinate operations  of  lawless  principles  are  often  per- 
ceived by  the  diinest  eye,  to  be  the  ministers  of  death 
to  our  physical  constitution.  How  frequently  is  an  ex- 
cess of  love,  or  joy,  or  grief,  or  food,  or  drink,  made 
the  swift  messengers  of  our  dissolution!  And  how  much 
more  frequent  still,  do  the  operations  of  avarice,  envy, 
hate,  and  frequent  rage,  by  slow  degrees,  prematurely 
bow  the  human  frame,  plant  the  grey  hair  in  the  youthful 
head;  draw  deep  furrows  on  the  almost  beardless  face; 
and  place  the  green  sods  over  him  that  has  scarcely 
lived  out  half  his  days!  But  how  different  had  man  re- 
mained the  sinless  inhabitant  of  Eden,  with  all  his  pow- 
ers divinely  controuled,  so  that  each  would  glide  along 
smoothly,  and  peacefully  in  its  own  appropriate  channel, 
without  any  impediments  or  excesses!  Then  under  the 
sunsliine  of  his  Maker's  beatific  presence,  his  soul  was 
filled  with  light,  and  love;  then  no  war  of  principles,  no 
tumults  of  conflicting  passions,  and  no  encroachment  of 
jarring  propensities,  em!)roiled  his  blood,  swelled  his 
veins,  or  distorted  his  frame.  And  who  can  prove, 
that  all  the  health  of  blooming  youth,  and  of  vigorous 
majihood,  might  not  be  as  eternal  as  the  soul,  if  the  man 
were  completely  free  from  sins,  disruptions  and  disor- 
ders? Thus  in  the  moment  when  our  first  parents,  by 
the  fall  became  alienated  from  God,  they  began  to  die 
temporally.  Their  bodies  then  began  that  tendency  to 
dissolution,  which  continued  its  progress  until  the  sen- 
tence was  accomplished:  Dust  thou  art  and  unto  dust 
thou  shaft  return. 

And  as  the  washes  of  sin  is  death  without  any  limita- 
tion, exposure  to  the  second  death,  to  everlasting  destruc 
tion  from  the  presence  of  Ood  and  from  the  glory  of  his 
power,  was  one  of  the  consequences  which  Adam  incur- 
red by  his  first  sin,  and  one  which  he  had  endured,  as 
certaiiilv  as  he  did  the  dissolution  of  the  body,  had  not 


137 

the  Saviour  been  revealed  in  the  promise,  the  seed  of 
of  the  ivonian  shall  bruise  the  serpent's  head. 

This  may  not  however  be  considered  a  kind  of  death 
entirely  distinct  from  spiritual.  It  is  rather  spiritual 
death  continued  and  enlarged.  No  doubt  an  essential^ 
if  not  the  greater  part  of  the  torments  of  the  inhabitants 
of  woe,  arises  from  a  total  surrender  to  their  depravity, 
w^hich  inhanced  by  their  sins  on  earth,  is  still  aggravated 
more  and  more,  by  all  the  successive  acts  of  rebellion 
throughout  the  interminable  years  of  their  miserable 
duration.  If  it  be  the  nature  of  transgression  to  pro- 
duce depravity  of  heart,  and  of  that  depravity  by  a  kind 
of  reaction  to  multiply  transgressions;  and  if  men  are 
miserable  in  proportion  to  the  malignity  of  their  dispo- 
sitions, this  is  sufficient  to  account  for  much  of  the  fire 
that  shall  never  be  quenched,  and  of  the  worm  that  shall 
never  die. 

Such  is  believed  to  be  the  state  into  which  the  fall 
brought  Adam.     It  is  proposed  to  enquire, 

2.  Into  ivhat  estate  did  the  fall  bring  his  posterity? 

Into  precisely  the  same  as  that  in  which  Adam  was 
introduced  by  his  violation  of  the  probationary  prohi- 
bition of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil. 
As  Adam  for  his  first  sin,  was  banished  from  Eden,  so 
all  his  descendants  are  born  out  of  its  sacred  pales.  The 
wages  of  si?i  is  death;  death  has  passed  upon  all  men; 
therefore,  all  have  sinned.  Even  infants  that  have  not 
been  guilty  of  any  actual  transgression  die;  but  as  death, 
is  the  wages  of  sin,  they  must  be  viewed  as  guilty  of 
some  sin,  and  as  there  is  no  other  to  w  hose  penalty  and 
consequences  they  can  be  liable,  they  must  be  affected 
with  that  sin,  which  exists,  not  in  personal  commission, 
but  in  nature,  usually  denominated  original  sin.  Adam 
in  his  fallen  condition,  begat  a  son,  not  in  the  image  and 
after  the  likeness  of  God;  but  in  his  own  image,  and 
after  his  own  likeness.  As  all  men  inherit  their  nature 
from  their  first  father,  so  also,  they  inherit  the  infection, 
and  the  guilt  of  his  first  sin:  Or  in  other  words,  they  are 
introduced  into  the  world,  with  tlie  same  destitution  of 

18 


138 

conrormity  to  God's  image:  with  the  same  moral  dark- 
ness of  mind;  and  with  the  same  derangement  and  per- 
version of  the  princ'i])les  of  haman  nature,   with  which 
Adam's  whole  moral  man  was  despoiled  as  a  consequence 
of  the  fall,  and  are  all  therefore,  like  him  disconformed 
to  the  likeness  of  God;  and  like  him  suhject  to  the  ra- 
vages of  natural  death.     They  enter  the  world,  with  all 
the  j)rinciples  essential  to  human  nature  as  such;  but 
destitute  of  that  moral  conformity  to  the  likeness  of  God, 
which  our  whole  nature  lost  in  man's  first  transgression 
— that  adventitious  principle,  indispensable  to  subor- 
dinate every  merely  human  power  to  its  proper  sphere, 
and  direct  it  to  its  pro])er  object.       They   possess  still 
the  original  power  of  loving;  but  are  destitute  of  that 
knowledge,  which  can  discern  spiritual  things,  and  illu- 
mine the  pathway  of  affection  to  God,  who  ought  to  be 
made  the  Supreme  object  of  human  love.     And  hence, 
they  love  the  creature,  more  than  the  Creator.     Their 
love  is  now  exclusively  devoted  to  that  which  delights 
the  eye,  charms  the  ear,   regales  the  taste,   pampers 
pride,  feeds  avarice,  gratifies  ambition,  or  that,  in  any 
way  ministers  to  their  appetites  and  passions;  and  espe- 
cially to  that,   which  is  the  strongest,  and  the  ruling 
principle  in  their  respective  constitutions.     They  love 
no  object,  because  in  it,   they  see,  hear,   feel,  or  taste, 
the  gv-iodness  and  the  glory  of  their  Maker;  but  wholly, 
because  it  is  subservient  to  the  enjoyment  of  some  infe- 
rior principle.     And  as  in  the  principle  of  love  there  is 
a  perversion,  so  also  in  the  piinciple  of  hate.     They 
hate  that  which  is  o])posed  to  the  lawless  indulgence  of 
that  passion,    or   appetite,   which  predominates  in  the 
constitution  of  each;  and  especially  do  they  hate  God, 
whose  righteous  nature,  expressed  in  his  holy  will,  erects 
the  standard  which  'makes  i^uch  a  perversion  of  ])rinci- 
plcs  lawless.     And  hence  all  are  gone  astray;  they  love 
that  which  they  should  hate,  and  hate  that  which  they 
shoidd  love.     They  call   evil   good  and  good  evil;  and 
put  darkness  for  light  and  light  for  darkness;  and  bitter 
for  sweet  and  sweet  for  bitter. .     Thus  they  are  like 
Adam  after  the  fall,  spiritually  dead;  the  certain  can- 


^39 

didates  of  death  temporal;  and  except  saved  by  faith  in 
the  only  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  they  are  also 
certainly  devoted  to  death  eternal. 

Natural  death  prevailing  over  infants  who  never  sin- 
ned after  the  similitude  of  Adam'  transgression,  is 
deemed  irrefragable  proof  of  the  doctrine  which  sup- 
poses all  Adam's  posterity  representatively  involved  in 
the  consequences  of  his  apostacy;  confirms  the  testimony 
of  the  Psalmist:  behold  I  was  shaped  in  iniquity;  and 
in  sin  did  my  mother  conceive  me;  and  accounts  for  the 
fact  that  all  men  go  astray  as  soon  as  they  are  born  spea- 
king lies. 

It  is  however  asserted  by  some,  that  the  wages  of  sin 
is  not  natural  death.  It  is  submitted  to  the  decision  of 
the  intelligent,  and  the  candid,  whether  it  has  not  al- 
ready been  made  sufficiently  obvious,  that  the  Bible 
gives  not  the  least  countenance  to  such  an  opinion.  If 
any  doubt,  however  should  remain,  the  following  text 
appears  to  be  sufficiently  conclusive  to  remove  it,  if  it 
be  at  all  reasonable:  For  since  by  man  came  death^  by 
7nan  came  also  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  For  as  in 
Mam  all  die  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive. 
Here  death  is  said  to  come  by  man,  and  by  Adam^  upon 
all  men.  And  it  can  not  possibly  mean  any  other,  but 
natural  death.  It  appears  from  the  context  to  be  pre- 
cisely the  same  kind  of  death  as  that  from  which  Christ 
arose,  when  he  became  the  first  fruits  of  them  that  slept. 

In  this  connexion  the  words  slept^  dead^  and  deaths 
are  undeniably  employed  in  reference  to  the  dissolution 
of  the  body.  The  mortality  of  man's  body,  is  there- 
fore the  result  of  our  connexion  with  the  first  man.  But 
how  die  in  Adam?  In  Adam  as  he  came  out  of  the  hands 
of  his  Maker,  or  in  Adam  after  he  had  lost  his  original 
conformity  to  his  Maker's  Image? — Undoubtedly  in 
Adam  in  his  lapsed  state.  In  the  contrast  Christ  is  ex- 
hibited, as  overcoming  this  death,  which  all  die  in  Adam, 
by  making  them  alive  in  the  morning  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. Now  as  Clirist  is  no  where  represented  as  un- 
doing any  blessing  which  belonged  to  man  in  a  sinless 
state;  but  on  the  contrary  as  destroying  the  works  of  the 


140 

Devil;  any  other  conclusion,  but  that  he  counteracts  the 
consequences  of  man's  apostacy  by  Adam  in  the  pro- 
duction of  death,  by  raising  the  dead  from  their  natural 
graves,  is  absolutely  impossible.  And  if  so  death  na- 
tural as  well  as  moral  is  the  wages  of  sin;  and  if  natural 
death  be  the  wages  of  sin,  death  wherever  found,  whe- 
ther in  adults  or  infants  betokens  the  existence  of  sin. 

The  principle  of  this  doctrine  *  is  confirmed  by  obvi- 
ous facts.  From  daily  observation  we  learn,  that  the 
condition  of  children,  is  often  involved  in  the  conduct 
of  parents.  If  parents  through  their  own  folly  or  ne- 
glect, are  cast  upon  an  inhospitable  and  dreary  island, 
their  children  born  there  become  partakers  in  their  so- 
litude and  their  sufferings.  If  a  parent  through  his 
vices  or  his  indolence  squander  his  paternal  inheritance, 
his  children  with  himself,  share  the  inconveniences  of 
poverty. 

Again  the  conduct  of  parents  often  entail  on  their 
children  physical  evils.  The  vices  of  a  parent  produce 
disease  in  his  own  constitution.  The  contamination  is 
conveyed  from  father  to  son  for  successive  generations. 
How  often  do  we  find  families  afflicted  with  hereditary 
diseases!  The  descendants  of  some  families  are  the  sub- 
jects of  early  blindness;  others  of  consumption;  and  o 
thers  again  of  mental  derangement. 

The  conduct  of  parents  often  involve  their  ofispring 
in  moral  evils.  All  see,  and  admit,  the  deleterious  in- 
fluence produced  by  the  example  of  a  wicked  parent. 
Children  nurtured  and  reared  in  idleness  and  irreligion, 
generally  live  and  die  as  they  were  educated. 

These  are  facts,  which  demonstrate  the  representative 
influence  of  the  conduct  of  parents  over  the  condition 
of  children. 

But  it  is  objected,  that  this  doctrine  impugns  the  justice 
of  God.  If  however  it  be  taught  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
supported  by  imdeniable  facts,  it  is  folly  for  mortals  who 
know  almost  nothing,  to  pronounce  it  unjust.  It  is  sup- 
posed  to  be  unjust,  that  God  should  constitute  Adam  a 
representative,  in  whose  choice  and  conduct  the  moral 
and  phyMcal  destiny  of  all  th^.  unborn  millions  of  his  pos- 


141 

terity,  should  be  involved,  without  our  knowledge  and 
without  our  choice. 

From  the  positions  implied  in  this  objection,  it  can  be 
fairly  demonstrated,  that  the  great  principle  of  repre- 
sentation,  the  performance  of  the  will  of  the  represented, 
is  maintained. 

In  denying  that  all  men  were  represented  by  Adam, 
this  objection  virtually  denies,  that  their  condition  is  in 
the  least  affected  by  his  fall.  The  first  proposition  im- 
plies the  second.  If  the  condition  of  mankind  be  in  the 
least  degree  affected  by  the  first  human  transgression, 
Adam  must  have  been  constituted  our  representative  to 
the  extent,  in  which  our  condition  is  affected;  be  that 
more  or  less.  Call  it  what  you  please,  Constitiitinn  or 
Representation  the  principle  is  the  same.  And  if  in  the 
extent  for  which  we  contend,  it  be  unjust,  narrow  down  its 
application  as  much  as  you  can,  still  whatever  remains  of 
it  will  remain  unjust.  You  lessen  its  magnitude,  but  do 
not  alter  its  nature.  If  therefore,  it  be  unjust  in  God  as 
the  objection  supposes,  to  constitute  Adam  our  repre- 
sentative, so  far,  that  his  violation  of  the  command,  thou 
shalt  not  eat,  should  involve  us  in  both  the  guilt  and  the 
suffering  oi  his  sin,  it  was  surely  no  less  unjust,  to  con- 
stitute such  a  connexion  between  us  and  him,  that  his 
disobedience,  should  involve  us  in  the  suffering  of  his  sin 
without  any  guilt;  which,  if  the  supposition,  that  we  are 
not  representatively  guilty,  contained  in  the  objection, 
be  true,  is  the  fact  with  every  actless  infant  that  agoni- 
zes in  disease,  and  wriths  in  death.  Hence  if  God  did 
not  place  Adam  as  a  representative,  so  that  our  innocence 
or  our  guilt,  as  vvell  as  our  happiness,  or  our  misery, 
should  be  involved  in  his  obedience,  or  his  transgression, 
then  God's  constituted  connexion  between  the  deed  of 
Adam  and  the  condition  of  his  children,  was  such,  that 
his  first  sin  entailed  misery  on  the  innocent;  a  monstrous 
conclusion!  and  is  at  least  as  unjust,  as  to  make  his  con- 
duct represent  our  guilt  as  well  as  our  misery .  Conse- 
quently, all  mankind  by  the  representative  transgression 
of  Adam,  became  guilty  as  well  as  miserable — the  prin- 
ciple for  which  we  contend — or,  the  condition  of  Adam's 


142 

children,  is  not  in  the  least  injured  by  this  fall.  There 
is  no  principle  for  middle  ground.  Of  course  an  objec- 
tor argues  upon  no  principle,  or  he  assumes  the  position, 
that  ail  mankind  are  born  into  the  world  as  sinless  as  was 
Adam  when  lie  fell  from  the  hands  of  his  Maker.  Now 
if  every  son  and  daughter  of  Adam,  that  has  ever  come 
into  the  w^orld,  and  lived  to  years  of  moral  agency,  has 
sinned,  as  is  proved  to  be  the  fact  from  such  texts  as 
declare,  that  he  thatsaithhe  hath  no  sin,  is  a  liar  and,  the 
truth  is  not  in  him;  then  every  son  and  daughter  of 
Adam,  who  arrives  at  years  of  moral  agency,  performs 
in  person  the  deed  of  the  first  father,  in  disobeying  God. 
Then  if  all  tlie  posterity  of  Adam,  had  been  present 
when  he  took  the  fruit,  they  would  all  have  followed 
his  example;  and  then  his  taking  the  fruit,  was  just  the 
thing  which  they  would  have  approved;  and  is  just  the 
thing  that  by  their  present  conduct,  they  actually  do 
aplrrove,  Consecpienrly,  if  tliey  had  appointed  Adam  as 
tiieir  representative,  and  instructed  him  how  to  act  in 
that  capacity,  they  would  have  directed  him  to  the  very 
choice  which  he  made.  Where  then  is  the  injustice  of 
constituting  Adam  a  representative  for  his  posterity,  if  he 
have  actually  made  the  very  choice  which  they  ^11  ratify? 
If  a  minister  plenipotentiary  sent  by  our  government 
to  Great  Britain,  represent  in  a  treaty  the  wishes  of  a 
majority  of  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  there 
could  be  no  reasonable  complaint  of  the  injustice  of  his 
legation;  much  less,  if  he  represented  every  individual 
so  well,  that  if  all  had  been  present,  they  would  ratify 
the  treaty.  Thus  if  all  the  children  of  Adam  enter  life 
as  pure  as  angels — the  position  assumed  by  the  objec- 
tion— their  own  choice  proves  that  the  doctrine  which 
supposes  Adam  as  a  representative,  involves  nothing  tliat 
can  be  legitimately  construed,  to  impugn  the  justice  of 
such  a  constitution.  But  the  objection  comprehends  in 
itself,  tlie  materials  of  its  own  destruction.  It  suppo- 
ses men  to  be  born  sinless:  it  can  not  but  admit  that  in- 
fants who  have  by  no  deed  violated  their  Maker's  law, 
endure  sickness,  pain,  and  death;  and  thiis  by  implicar 
tion.  it  charges  God  with  the  cruelty  of  inflicting  pain 


143 

and  death  upon  the  innocent,  and  opposes  the  revealed 
truth,  that  he  does  not  afflict  willingly  or  grieve  the 
children  of  men. 

But  the  constitution  which  made  Adam  the  represen- 
tative of  his  posterity?  so  far  from  being  unjust  and  un- 
merciful as  the  objection  supposes,  may  be  shown  to  be 
directly  the  contrary. 

Facts  prove,  that  God  designed  to  bring  the  human 
race  into  the  world  in  a  state  of  infancy  and  weakness, 
in  their  corporal,  mental,  and  moral  powers.  Now  if 
each  one  of  these  had  been  permitted  to  stand  for  him- 
self so  that  his  first  act  should  involve  his  future  moral 
condition,  there  would  have  been  more  probability  that 
every  one  would  fall  if  standing  thus  for  himself,  than 
if  he  were  represented  by  Adam.  He  would  be  exposed 
to  temptation  in  the  years  of  childhood  and  weakness, 
when  he  might  be  most  easily  overcome,  wdiilst  on  the 
contrary,  Adam  was  introduced  into  the  world,  in  the 
bloom  of  bodily,  mental,  and  moral  vigor,  and  there- 
fore, better  qualified  to  resist  temptation  and  maintain 
his  moral  standing,  than  any  of  his  infant  and  youthful 
children  could  ever  be.  Besides,  being  the  represen- 
tative  of  all  his  posterity,  he  had  all  the  inducements, 
that  could  be  drawn  from  the  happiness,  or  the  misery, 
of  unborn  millions  to  influence  him  to  stand  to  his  recti- 
tude. 

Perhaps  to  this  however  it  may  be  objected,  that  men 
in  childhood  and  early  youth,  are  not  moral  agents;  and 
not  accountable;  and  that  the  conduct,  which  affects 
their  moral  condition,  belongs  to  a  period  of  life,  in 
which  every  individual  is  as  mature  in  all  the  powers, 
both  of  mind  and  body,  as  Adam  was  when  he  was  crea- 
ted. This  supposition  is  not  admitted  as  a  fact.  But 
suppose  it  to  be  so:  and  still  every  individual  of  Adaift's 
children,  during  the  season  of  minority,  is  now  under  the 
influence  of  surrounding  example,  so  that  habits  are  for- 
med in  childhood  and  youth,  which  exert  a  most  mischie- 
vous influence  over  the  morals  of  more  advanced  life;  so 
that  make  the  years  of  accountability  when  you  please, 
still  his  circumstances  for  standing  in  rectitude  are  far 


144 

inferior  to  those  oi*  Adain,  who  was  exempt  from  the 
con  tarn  illation  of  pernicions  example,  and  all  the  bias  of 
early  contracted  evil  habits.  There  was  therefore  more 
probability,  that  the  whole  family  of  mankind  would  be 
established  in  a  state  of  felicity  by  making  Adam  a  rep- 
resentative by  ^^  hose  conduct  they  would  either  stand  or 
fall,  than  if  every  man's  moral  destiny  had  been  suspen- 
ded on  his  own  personal  probation.  This  dispensation 
therefore  instead  of  being  unjust  and  cruel  is  the  most  e- 
quitable,  and  the  most  merciful. 

It  is  imagined  by  some,  that  this  doctrine  makes  God 
the  author  of  sin.  If  the  human  race  are  all  introduced 
into  existence  as  sinners,  say  the  objectors,  does  not  this 
doctrine  suppose  that  God  made  them  such  as  they  are? 

In  answer  to  this  objection,  it  may  be  remarked  in  the 
first  place,  that  the  argument  bears  equally  against  all 
denominations  of  Christians,  who  believe  that  men  are 
born  sinners,  whether  they  suppose  them  to  be  represen- 
ted by  Adam  or  not:  and  in  the  second  place  we  are  not 
to  consider  original  sin  to  exist  in  the  implanting  of  some 
wicked  principle  by  the  hand  of  God.  The  Creator 
now,  and  ever  since  the  fall,  brings  man  into  the  world 
possessing  as  Adam  before  his  first  sin,  all  the  essential 
principles  of  human  nature,  which  he  himself  at  first  pro- 
nounced very  good,  Man's  body  and  soul,  the  princi- 
ples of  his  animality,  his  intellectual  powers,  his  moral 
sense,  his  love  and  his  hate,  all  the  passions  of  his  mind, 
are  in  themselves  essential  principles  of  the  human  con- 
8titution;  and  are  therefore,  in  themselves  still  very  good. 
It  is  only  the  misapplication  of  them,  the  perversion  of 
them  to  forbidden  objects,  that  is  WTong.  If  therefore, 
these  principles  are  in  themselves  good,  the  creation  of 
them  can  not  be  justly  denominated  the  production  of  e- 
vil,  and  God  their  Maimer  can  not  be  charged  in  this 
work  with  the  Authorship  of  evil.  The  perversion  of 
these  good  things  is  the  creature's  act  and  not  God's. 
All  that  in  man,  is  wanting  is  the  inhabitation  and  the 
illuniinating,and  controuling  influences  of  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit, producing  that  advent  it  ions  principle,  conformity 
to  God's  image,  which  man  lost  by  the  fall. 


145 

Original  sin  therefore,  consists  not  in  any  corrupt 
principles  implanted,  nor  in  the  withholding  of  any  prin- 
ciple, which  originally  made  any  essential  part  of  man's 
constitution;  but  simply  in  the  absence  of  that  conformi- 
ty to  God's  image,  which  was  borne  away  on  the  wings 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  when  for  man's  first  sin  he  forsook 
Paradise.  According  to  the  laws  which  God  has  insti- 
tuted for  regulating  the  arrangement  of  the  particles 
which  successively  enter  into  the  composition  of  the  hu- 
man body,  where  an  incision  is  made  in  the  flesh;  it  is 
followed  by  a  scar.  And  as  these  laws  are  but  the  va- 
ried operations  of  Deity,  it  is  his  power  that  arranges 
the  particles  so  that  the  scar  appears  as  a  consequence 
of  the  incision.  Suppose  God  should  command  a  man 
to  abstain  from  wounding  his  own  flesh,  and  should  on 
the  one  hand,  promise  him  if  he  obeyed,  that  his  body 
should  remain  free  from  scars,  and  on  the  other,  warn 
him  that  if  he  did  not,  they  should  be  inflicted  on  him 
as  a  penalty  for  his  disobedience;  but  the  man  should 
however  in  direct  violation  of  his  Maker's  prohibition;, 
inflict  on  his  own  body  a  deep  and  dreadful  wound,  so 
that  he  should  become  much  deformed,  and  injured  by  a 
scar;  would  not  the  man  himself  and  not  Gocl^  be  the 
author  of  his  deformity?  So  Adam  representing  human 
nature,  in  disinheriting  the  Holy  Spirit  from  his  soul, 
by  his  abominable  sin,  inflicted  on  human  nature  a  wound 
which  is  followed  by  the  scar  of  original  sin;  and  is  not 
\\\\md.\\  nature  represented  by  Adam  then  the  proper  au- 
thor of  this  scar? 

And  thus  in  the  language  of  our  Confession  of  Faith, 
*^The  covenant  being  made  with  Adam  not  only  for  him- 
self, but  for  his  posterity;  all  mankind  descending  from 
him  by  ordinary  generation,  sinned  in  him,  and  fell  with 
him,  in  his  first  transgression." 

The  moral  turpitude  of  this  lapsed  condition  of  human 
nature,  consists  in  disconformity  to  that  state  to  which 
the  nature  of  Deity  expressed  by  his  law,  requires  con- 
formity; and  not  in  the  principles  by  which  it  was  pro- 
duced, gr  in  other,  and  fewer  words:  in  the  nature  of 

19 


146 

the  thing  itseJJ)  and  not  in  its  cause.  Not  in  the  prin- 
pies  employed  in  its  production;  for  they  are  good;  but 
in  the  misapplication  of  those  principles.  This  misap- 
plication takes  its  rise  in  the  Jinite  understandin:^',  and 
natural  liberty  of  man;  or  as  it  would  be  impossible  for  a 
holy  being  of  infinite  knowledge  to  err  in  choice,  it 
would  be  more  accurate  to  say,  it  results  wholly  from 
the  finite  nature  of  a  creature' s  understanding. 

But  altliough  man  is  shapen  in  iniquity  and  conceived 
in  sin,  it  is  not  a  legitimate  consequence,  that  those  who 
die  in  a  state  of  inl^mcy  are  lost.  The  Saviour's  blood 
which  when  applied  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  tl-e  soul  of  an 
adult  cleanses  from  all  sin,  will  also  when  applied  by  the 
same  power  to  the  heart  of  an  inftmt,  be  attended  with 
the  same  purifying  efhcacy. 

Sinner,  dost  thou  complain  of  thy  representation  by 
Adam? — Behold  Christ  a  better  representative!  Come  to 
him,  and  whosoever  cometh  unto  him,  he  v.  ill  in  no  wise 
cast  out.  He  is  ready  to  send  his  regenerating  Spirit 
to  dissolve,  by  his  heavenly  iniluence,  thy  connexion 
with  the  first  man,  and  to  unite  thee  by  a  living  faith  to 
the  second,  the  Lord  from  heaven.  It  is  now  as  fairly 
put  to  thy  choice,  whether  thou  wilt  break  off  thy  rela- 
tion to  Adam,  and  obtain  a  restoration  of  the  conformity 
to  the  divine  image,  which  he  lost  by  the  fall,  as  it  was 
put  to  his,  whether  or  not,  he  would  eat  the  forbidden 
fruit,  and  forfeit  that  conformity  by  his  disobedience. 
Murmer  not  at  his  representative  act,  wiienthouin  thine 
own  person,  confinnest  his  transgression  by  thine  own 
choice.  Complain  not  at  his  folly  in  losing  his  original 
conformity  to  the  Maker's  image,  when  thou  thyself  re- 
fusest  its  restoration. 


For,  its  being  called  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good, 
intimated,  that  man,  if  from  a  T)rinciple  of  love,  he  o- 
bcyed  this  prol)ationary  prece]>t,  should  come  to  the 
knowledge,  sense,  aiul  fru.ition  of  that  good  which  is  tru- 
ly^ and  excellently  so,  and  the  full  knowledge  of  which, 


147 

is  only  obtainable  by  sense  and  enjoyment.  On  the  o- 
ther  hand  when  called  the  tree  of  hnovAedge  of  evil, 
thereby  it  signified  thatman^if  found  disobedient^  should 
be  doomed  to  the  greatest  calamity-  the  exceeding  evil, 
and  wretchedness  he  should  at  last  know  by  experience 
—  Witshis  on  the  Covenants. 

The  most  probable  opinion  of  the  tree  of  life^  is  that  it 
was  given' to  man  to  enjoy  as  a  symbol  of  that  eternal  life 
which  should  be  his^  on  his  continued  obedience  to  the 
probationary  precept;  and  that  he  was  permitted  to  eat 
of  it  so  long  as  he  remained  innocent;  for  it  was  among 
the  trees  of  the  garden  over  which  he  at  the  first  had 
full  privilege.  But  so  soon  as  man  had  violated  the  con- 
dition, he  forfeited  life,  and  was  no  longer  permitted  to 
partake  of  this  symbol.  If  God  then  had  permitted  Adam 
to  use  it  as  a  symbol  of  eternal  life,  it  would  have  been  an 
acknovvledgcment  of  his  right  to  that  which  he  had  for- 
feited, the  acknowledgement  of  a  falsehood  for  a  truth. 
And  hence  says  God,  £.nd  noiv  lest  he  put  forth  his  hand 
and  take  also  of  the  tree  of  life ^  and  eat ^  arid  live  forever 
(according  to  the  condition  of  this  symbol);  therefore  the 
Lord  God  sent  liim  forth  from  the  garden  of  Eden, 


JIPPE.YDIX, 

To  Joseph  Lybrand,  Samuel  Merwin,  Samuel  Doughty, 
John  Lednum^  Elisha  Andrews,  Manning  Force,  The- 
mas  F.   Sargent,  Thomas  Miller,  W.  W.  Wallace, 
and  Thomas   Dunn,   committee   of  publication;    and 
John  Clarke  Editor  of  the  Religious  Messenger. 
From  your  ^^'Keligious  Messenger  of  the  Philadelphia 
Conference^'  of  the  15th  inst.  it  appears,  that  the  story 
of  the  oyster-man  related  in  the  appendix  of  Christian 
Preacher  No.  4,  p.  93,  has  given  mortal  offence.     You 
recognize  him  as  a  Methodist  preacher,  call  him  an  able 
m^nisttlVV^W — and  say,    that  he  was  instrumental  in 
bringing  manv  from  sin  to  holiness;   and  to  cap  the  cli- 
max," admit  the  anecdote  to  be  materially  true!!!  If  we 
could  oBiV  be  convinced  that  all  these  contradictions 


148 

are  lacts,  wc  should  be  prepared  to  believe^  that  the  age 
of  miracles  has  not  yet  passed  away.  But  no  specimen 
of  your  theological  acumtn,  or  of  your  veracity,  given 
in  the  strictures  on  the  Christian  Preacher^  is  believ  ed  to 
impose  any  obligation  to  suppose,  either,  that  you  are 
qualified  to  judge  of  the  true  character  of  Scriptural 
holiness,  or,  that  if  you  were,  your  assertions  are  to  be 
accredited  without  great  qualifications.  It*  is  not  in- 
deed to  the  honor  of  Methodism,  that  an  Editorial 
faculty  representing  the  Conference  of  Philadelphia, 
should  stand  before  the  public  in  such  a  predicament; 
but  for  the  facts,  your  own  strictures,  and  the  Appen- 
dixes of  Christian  Preacher  Nos.  4  and  5,  are  re- 
ferred to  as  proof.  From  the  specimens  there  given  of 
your  veracity,  we  consider  ourselves  perfectly  at  liberty 
to  believe  as  few  of  your  assertions  as  we  please.  The 
Apostle  Paul  informs  us,  that  a  Christian  minister  ought 
to  be  ^^apt  to  teach"  [didaktikon];  ^'one  capable  of  tea- 
ching,*' says  Dr.  Adam  Clarke.  Is  a  public  bawier,  who 
makes  God  an  r>?/.9/frman,  apt  to  teach  any  thing  but  non- 
sense? Where  has  God  promised  to  set  the  seal  of  the 
Spirit  to  any  thing  but  the  truth?  If  such  adeclaimermake 
converts  at  all,  it  must  be  only  from  7iien  to  oyster -men,. 
and  not  from  sin  to  holiwss.  Yet  under  the  authority 
of  the  Philadelphia  Conference,  you  pronounce  such  a 
man,  an  able  preacherW  If  such  be  an  able  Methodist 
preacher,  it  might  be  a  matter  of  curiosity  to  know  the 
dimensions  of  a  moderate  one. 

At  a  time,  when  it  was  fashionable  to  wear  the  hair  col- 
lected in  an  elevation  on  the  summit  of  the  head,  a  cer- 
tain minister  is  said  to  have  selected  froni  the  following 
passage:  Let  him  u:bo  is  on  the  house  top  not  come 
don^n,  these  words:  Top  not  come  down;  and  deduced 
from  them  a  doctrine  levelled  against  to])  knots,  the  then 
fashionable  mode  of  wearing  the  hair.  This  man  accor- 
ding to  your  standard  may  have  been  an  able  minister!! 

A  gcntJeman  descending  one  of  our  Western  rivers,  was  detained 
«evcral  days  in  a  neiglibourliood  where  he  spent  the  Sabbath.  Reing 
told,  that  a  r^^lebrated  orator  wasex})ected  to  preach  that  daj^  he  de- 
termined to  go,  though  the  distance  was  considerable,  to  become  one 


149 

«f  his  hearers.  He  however  was  so  unfortunate,  as  not  to  arrive  at 
the  place  of  meeting  until  after  tne  service  had  sometime  commenced. 
He  found  the  congregation  collected  in  a  barn,  and  all  in  a  state  of 
upr  »ar.  Some  were  lying  down,  some  jumping,  and  others  shou- 
ting; and  although  he  heard  the  preacher's  voice,  elevated  aboveall  the 
other  noise,  he  was  unable  on  entv:ring  the  door,  to  understand  the 
subject  on  which  he  apjieared  to  speak  with  great  fluency  and  pathos. 
He  drew  nearer  and  nearer  the  stand  on  which  the  Reverend  gentleman 
was  located;  but  was  unable  to  catch  the  thread  ot  his  discourse,  un- 
til he  came  almost  within  an  arm's  reach  of  the  orator;  and  then  by 
a  close  application  of  his  auditory  powers,  he  found,  that  it  consisted 
in  a  constant  repetition  of  these  words,  now  in  a  higher,  and  agam  ia. 
a  lower  tone  of  voice,  varymg  as  he  supposed  the  state  oi  his  congre- 
gation required:  *^T/ie  Devil's  a  liar!  The  DeviVs  a  liar!  The  De-irs 
a  liar!  Although  the  words  are  true  in  themselves,  and  the  perfor- 
mance was  less  harmful,  than  an  attempt  to  rtfuie  doctrines  nut  undtr- 
stood  by  a  speaker,  and  than  those  xvretcfied  atiacks  which  "wefrKiUentlj 
loitness,  made  in  the  pulpit  on  other  denonri nations;  yet  the  gentlemen 
soon  hecame  weary  in  hearing  so  tedious  repetition  of  words,  which 
he  always  believed  were  true.  All  on  a  sudden  some  of  the  hearers 
began  to  climb  up  the  sides  of  the  barn,  and  cried  out,  that  they 
would  go  up  to  meet  the  Saviour,  and  get  religion,  1  he  speaker 
then  elevated  h*is  key  of  vociferation,  and  immediately,  a  black  man, 
who  had  been  sitting  on  a  long  pole,  placed  ovei  head,  locking  his 
legs  around  it,  suspended  himself  over  the  congregation  v;ith  his  head 
downw?ards,  and  clapping  his  hands,  began  to  vociferate,  "glory! 
glory!  glory!"  The  gentlemen's  conscience  beginning  to  accuse  him 
of  breaking  the  Sabbath  by  wasting  its  sacred  hours  in  such  unmea- 
ning tumult,  he  withdrew  with  all  possible  expedition  to  his  lodgings. 

When  his  landlord  returned,  he  enquired  concerning  the  results  of 
the  exercises,  and  was  told,  that  a  great  many  were  converttd  to  day; 
and,  that  this  minister  converted  people  wherever  ht   went!!! 

How  much  this  landlord's  ideas  ot  an  able  ministry,  and  the  con- 
version of  multitudes  from  sin  to  holiness,  differ  from  yours  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  enquire.  But  certainly,  this  man's  claims  to  ability ,  are 
at  least  equal  to  those  of  the  oysttrrnan;  and  there  is  sufficient  reason 
to  believe,  that  the  converts  made  by  the  one,  are  as  enlightened  and 
as  pious,  as  those  made  by  the  other,  if  the  Conference  of  Philadel- 
phia are  to  betaken  as  a  true  represensative  of  your  society  generally, 
in  the  United  States;  and  if,  in  their  estimation,  such  be  able  minis- 
ters; and  such  be  conversions  from  sin  to  holiness;  then  there  is  ohvi- 
ously  a  distinction  between  an  able  Methodist  mihisicr,  and  an  abl- 
Christian  minister,  and  between  conversions  to  Methodism  and  conver- 
sions to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Jfthis  be  the  standard  of  Methodist 
conversions,  and  ministerial  ability;  then  the  fact  that  at  least,  one 
million  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  are  included  in  the  au- 
diences of  your  ministry  on  every  Sabbath  day,  can  be  regarded  as 
little  less,  than  a  calamity  to  the  spiritual  interests  of  the  church. 


150 

It  entered  not  into  the  original  design  of  the  Christian  Preacher  to 
make  attack:s  on  any  deno  ninations  of  Christians;  but  to  be  confined 
exclusively  to  the  discussion  of  principles;  the  work  is  in  its  nature  .uid 
tendency  pacific:  it  was  not  imagined  that  the  rej)resentatives  of  any 
ecclesiastical  body,  would  assail  it  with  the  weapons  of  isnoratice.y 
di.shigenHih/,d.nA  falsehood.  In  this  hovvever  rheie  was  a  mistake, 
which  the  attacks  in  your  Religious  Messenger  have  demonstrated. 
Assailants  of  such  a  character,  have  certainly  no  claim  to  forbearance, 
when  the  cause  of  truth  is  concerned.  Indeed  so  far  otherwise  is  the 
fact,  that  from  a  mere  love  of  peace,  to  permit  the  fair  empire  of  truth 
to  be  over  run,  and  trampled  under  foot  by  such  ruthless,  and  savage 
•invaders,  when  by  d  proper  resistance  they  might  be  repelled,  would 
be  disloyalty  to  the  King  of  Kings. 

The  story  of  ihe  oysierman  was  introduced  not  to  assail  any  intelligent 
^nd  pious  Methodist;  but  as  a  stroke  at  the  principle,  wherever  found,  which 
surrenders  the  pulpit  and  the  press  into  the  hands  of  theological  ignorance 
awA  illiteracy.  It  is  true  the  operations  of  the  principle  had  not  only  been  seen, 
but  felt,  in  the  attack  made  in  your  scrictures,  not  only  upon  the  Christian 
Preacher,  but  also  on  t.\\t  person  of  the  Editor — An  attack  of  such  a  charac- 
ter, as  would  never  have  been  made  hy  gentlemen  of  intelligence  and  lear- 
ning; much  less  by  Christian  gen  lemen  of  that  discription.  Under  these 
circumstances,  the  Committee  and  the  Conference  which  they  represented, 
were  allowed,  it  is  true,  to  coine  in  for  a  full  share  of  the  oysterman.  For 
a  stroke  at  such  a  princij)le  no  apology  need  be  made.  It,  is  below  argu- 
ment; and  'S  therefore,  fair  game  for  any  other  lawful  mode  of  attack. 

In  your  paper  you  give  what  you  call  a  Roland  for  an  Oliver.  Of  this  we 
utter  not  a  word  of  coinplaint.  In  our  defence  we  attacked  the  principle  of 
placing  the  ministry  of  reconciliation,  and  the  defence  of  sound  doctrine, 
in  the  hands  of  ignorance.  Njw  if  there  be  any  principle  in  the  Presbyte- 
rian church  prejudicial  to  the  interests  of  spiritual,  and  intelligent  Christi- 
anity, which  is  below  argument,  satirize  it  in  welcome.  Down  with  it  if 
>ou  can  But  do  yourselves  and  us,  the  justice  of  understanding  our  princi- 
ples, and  practices,  before  you  commence;  and  then,  you  will  save  yourselves 
the  sjn  and  the  shatne  of  publishing  falsehood,  and  us  the  trouble  o{  expo- 
.  5'ngit. 

The  amount  of  your  Roland  is  this;  Two  ministers,  a  Mr.  C.  a  Methodist 
anJ  a  Mr.  B  a  Presbyterian,  met  with  a  view  of  bringing  to  the  test,  each 
others  preaching  talents.  According  to  the  conditions  of  this  theological 
duel,  the  combatants  were  to  rise,  and  preach  in proviptii  on  whatever  text 
each  v/ould  give  the  other.  The  Presbyterian  gave  the  Methodist  the  fol- 
lowing: And  B  daxmrosc  up  in  the  viorning  and  saddled  his  Ass.  Mr.  C.  the 
Mi'thodist  arose  in  the  pulpit,  and  after  a  few  introductory  remarks,  divided 
his  subjects  as  fo  lows:   I.  Balaam;   II     The  saddle;  III.  The  As«:, 

In  the  course  of  the  sermon,  Balaam  was  made  to  represent  certain  priests 
(Prc<^.bvterian  mmisters  of  course),  wiio  hunt  after  riches  and  honors;  the 
saddle  their  salaries;  and  the  Ass.  their  peoj)le.  The  preacher  ai:er  ha- 
ving  finished  his  discourse,  sat  down  and  as  the  story  is,  gave  the  I'rcsbyte- 
rian  a  text  on  which  he  was  unable  to  speak  at  all,  and  ever  after  deserted 
the  ])i\lpit. 

Whether  the  story  be  true  or  false,  no  time  will  be  spent  to  enquire.  As 
.locile  Presbyteri-ins  we  will  jnsf  examine  whellicr  this  sermon  be  more  ap- 
plicable to  ourselves  than  to  Methodists. 

/  ll^itb  regard  tn  Balaarn.t,  'u.'hn  divine  for  money.  Are  there  more  in- 
ducements  in  the  Prenbytm-ian  church,  tlian  in  the  Methodist  Society,  to  di... 
vine  for  money?  Here  are.  rv.'o  young  mechanic,;  one  professes  to  be  a  Pros, 
byterian  and  the  other  a  Methodist.     They    become  v/eary  of  tkoir  trades. 


•151 

and  desirous  of  seme  other  einploynnent;  haveequal  and  respectable  natural 
talents;  both  having  a  standing  in  the  visible  church— the  form  of  godliness, 
but  equally  destitute  of  its  power.  They  would  be  preachers  because  they 
dislike  labour  and  covet  the  distinction. 

The  Methodist  without  any  expense,  and  with  almost  no  study,  can  be  a 
public  speaker  in  a  few  weeks,  and  a  preacher  in  a  few  months. 

But  the  Presbyterian  must  spend,  from  five  to  eight  years  in  preparation' 
for  the  work;  and  in  his  su])p()rt  during  this  long  interval  of  study  and 
preparation,  he  must  spend  his  own  money  if  he  have  any;  and  it  he 
have  none,  he  must  receive  assistance  from  the  libera!  and  the  pious,  orfinal- 
1} ,  he  must  borrow  mor.ey  if  he  can  find  any  one  to  loan  him,  and  enter  the 
ministry  after  the  expiration  of  five  or  eight  years  several  hundred  dollars  in 
debt.  Now  if  the  salary,  the  saddle,  be  as  good  in  the  Methodist  Society  as 
in  the  Presbyterian  church,  there  is  a  probabilty  of  ten  to  one,  that  the  Me- 
thodist enters  and  that  the  Presbyterian  does  not, 

II  7he  saddle  The  stated  salary  of  a  Methodist  preacher  is  one  hundred 
dollars  a  \ear;  his  wife,  if  he  have  one,  has  the  same.  A  house,  heavy  fur- 
niture, firewood,  table  provisions,  and  in  some  cases  servants,  are  furnished, 
or  are  required  to  be  furnished  by  the  circuit  or  the  church  where  he  labours. 
On  a  moderate  calculation  these  provisions  for  a  preacher  and  his  wife  will 
on  an  average  amount  to  two  hundred  d(  liars  more  Necessaries  are  also 
furnished  for  keeping  his  hcrse,  equal  probably  to  sixty  dollars  a  year;  and 
to  this  suna  must  be  added  other  contingent  expenses,  such  as  supplying  a 
horse  in  case  of  one  being  lost,  travelling  fare,  horseshoeing,  and  such  like, 
amounting  probably  to  forty  dollais  more. 

The  estimate  of  a  Methodist  preacher's  salary,  is  something  like  this: 
In  money  for  himself  and  wife  200 

House  and  provisions,  &,c.  &c.  &c,  200 

Horsekeeping  60 

Contingencies  40 

Total     S500* 

If  some  of  the  peachers  have  no  wives,  others  having  children  receive  an 
addiricnal  allowance  for  them;  so  that  g5C0  a  year  may  be  reckoned  the 
med'um  salary  for  each  minister 

If  one-fiftieth  of  the  Presbyterian  ministers  residing  in  cities,  receive  a  sala- 
ry of  ^1800  or  g2C00,  one  half  of  the  whole  number  in  country  congrega- 
tions, do  not  receive  g400;  so  that  any  number  of  Methodist  ministers  re- 
ceive annually  as  much  salary  as  the  same  number  of  Presbyterian  ministers, 

But  in  addition  to  this,  the  Meihodist  preacher  has  his  salary,  and  the  al- 
lowance for  his  family  continued,  in  case  he  becomes  superannuated,  or 
from  any  other  cause,  unable  to  preach.  If  he  die,  and  leave  a  widow  and 
children,  their  salary  is  still  paid.  On  the  other  hand,  if  a  Presbyterian  mi- 
nister, through  age  or  infirmity,  become  unable  to  perform  the  duties  of  a 
pastor,  he  receives  nothing  from  the  church  to  support  and  cheer  him  in  the 
years  of  infirmity  and  age;  and  if  he  die  and  leave  a  widow,  and  orphans 
they  have  no  claims  on  the  church  for  their  support.  Thus  it  appears,  that 
the  saddle  in  the  Methodist  Society,  is  if  any  thing,  the  better  of  the  two. 
But  can  a  Balaam  who  would  divine  for  money  find  an  Ms  in  the  Metho- 
dist Society  as  readily  as  in  the  Presbyterian  Church? 

///  Tie  Ass  is  to  be  considered.  We  beg  the  people's  pardon  for  intro- 
ducing them  under  so  unseemly  a  figure;  but  the  subject  is  divided  oflf  for  us 
by  the  Philadelphia  Conference. 

In  the  Presbyterian  church  no  minister  has  a  right  to  enter  the  pulpit  in 
any  congregation,  but  by  the  choice  of  the  people.  If  he  become  the  pastor 
of  a  congregation,  it  must  be  because  the  people  choose  him  as  such.  If  he 
receive  a  salary,  be  it  great  or  small,  it  is  because  the  ^to^W  choose  to  make 
It.  just  what  it  is. 


'See  the  note  at  the  end. 


15^ 

But  ill  the  Methodist  Society,  the  people  eiijoy  no  such  privileges.  The 
Methodist  Itineranicy  are  a  complete  Aristocracy.  Thty  choose  the  saddle 
theni'^elves.  They  stiplate  their  own  salaries.  From  a  book  entitled  «'The 
doctrines  and  discipline  of  ihe  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  Am-.-rica,"  \vc 
leitrn  that  as  late  as  Aniio  Domini  1812,  the  salary  of  each  minister  was 
only  §80;  but  now  we  find  it  one  hundred.  And  on  the  same  principle  as  the 
Society  gains  strength  and  inHuence,  we  may  expect  lo  see  tiicm  enlarge 
their  own  salaries  by  acts  of  conference  By  the  j)nnciples  Ujjon  which  the 
Society  is  coiisatu-ed  the  universal  sway  of  Mejihodism,  would  terminate  in 
universal  clerical  domination  and  tyranny.  The  jiower,  by  the  ver)  consti- 
tution ot  the  Society,  resides  totally  in  the  hands  of  thettergy;  the  universal 
sway  of  Methodism,  would  afford  an  opportunity,  and  present  a  temptation 
for  the  exercise  of  that  power;  and  we  can  not  say,  that  we  liave  discovered 
any  thing  in  the  Methodist  clergy  more,  than  in  others,  that  would  elevate 
tliem  above  the  influence  of  such  a  temptation.  Methodist  laymen  have  \\u 
more  to  say  in  acts  of  ecclesiastacal  legislation,  than  the  dead  in  the  grave. 
We  know  not  whether  thev  may  enter  the  door  of  a  confireace  house,  witii- 
out  a  special  act  of  grace.  A  Methodist  congregation,  or  curcuit,  possess  no 
ecclesiastical  right  to  say,  who  shall  be  their  minister.  The  mighty  hand  of 
the  Bishop,  mounts  on  them  whomsoverhe  will,  and  pleaded  or  displeased 
they  must  be  his  Ass  for  one  year;  and  wh»Tn  that  year  has  terminated,  he 
chooses  for  them  another  rider  with  whom  they  may  be  just  as  little  jileased 
as  with  the  first.  If  any  people  in  this  tree  c  )uatry  be  pnest  ridden,  the 
Methodists  most  of  all 

Thus  whilst  a  young  Presbyterian  Balaam  would  encounter  great  difficul- 
ties in  preparing  for  the  ministry,  with  nothing  before  him  better,  than  a 
perhaps  to  buoy  uj)  his  hopes  of  finding  a  peo])le,  that  will  chouse  to  give  him 
a  saddle  and  a  pleasant  ride,  the  young  Methodist  Balaam,  with  the  same 
shoes  in  which  he  walked  from  his  shop,  can  walk  into  the  Conference,  and 
the  next  day,  be  nv^unted  by  the  Bishop  on  a  curcuit.  We  are  now  willing 
that  the  public  should  judge,  where  there  are/jr.y/'a^/y  the  most  Balaams;  and 
also,  what  congregations,  whether  Prebbyterian  or  Methodist,  are  most  hke 
li«Alaam*s  beast. 

From  the  signs  of  the  times  al)Out  Baltimore,  it  would  seem  that  the  ani- 
mal, that  has  for  many  years  jigged  on  ver)  quietly  under  the  saddle  and  the 
rider,  has  at  last  become  restiif;  and  will  probably  soon  kick  up  under  the 
spur;  and  if  so,  there  is  some  ap[)rehension  that  Mie  Bishoi)5,  the  Balaams, 
and   the  oystermen,  as  well  as  the  top  hiots,  must  all  come  down 

If  the  peoj)le  should  rise,  assert  their  rights,  and  claim  the  reasonable  pri- 
vilege of  choosing  their  own  pastors,  there  would  probably  be  a  great  accession 
to  the  secular  professions  and  among  athers  p',>ssibiy  to  the  oyst'^r  trade. 

If  this  view  of  the  matter  be  just,  vou  attempt  at  a  Fola?id,  very  much  re- 
sembles the  attempt  of  a  certain  well  meaning  gentleman  to  give  a  saluta- 
tion ot  civility  in  Latin.  Some  wag  of  a  school  boy  told  him,  that 
ntultus  sum  [i  am  a  fool]  in  Latin,  meant  "good  morning'*  Some  time 
afterwards,  on  meeting  a  professional  man,  who  had  the  re|)Utation  of  pos- 
sessing high  classical  attainments,  he  thus  accosted  him:  stultus  sum.  Doc- 
tor. "Nothing  new,"  rc[)lied  the  Doctor  •'!  always  supposed  you  to  be  a  lool.'* 
Your  Roland  in  plain  English,  is  but  a  further  dtvelopment  of  ignorance. 

NOTE. 

Where  a  minister's  salary  is  made  out  in  a  kind  of  hidden  ivay,  in  house 
rent,  table  tare,  horse  feed,  fuel,  Ike  &.c.  ^c  articles  whose  qualities  and  i)ri- 
ces  vary  so  much  in  different  places  and  at  different  times,  it  is  difficult  for 
one  unacquaimtd  with  the  secret  rules  of  the  Society,  to  arrive  at  a  literally 
exact  estimate  of  the  amount.  ^Ve  aim  at  nothing  but  truth .  There  is  in 
the  calculation  no  intenticnal  error.  If  however  any  mistake  be  detcted  on 
beiag  authenuckly  inforn-icd  we  will  ch?erful!v  correct  it. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER. 


Vol.  1.  DECEMBER,  1827.  N°.  7, 


THE  FALL  OF  MAJV. 

And  when  the  woman  saw  that  the  tree  was  good  for  food,  and 
that  it  was  pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one 
wise,  she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof,  and  did  eat,  and  gave  also  unto  her 
husband  with  her,  and  be  did  eat. — Gen.  iii.  6". 

In  the  examination  of  this  subject  it  was  proposed,  to 
consider  the  following  question  as  the 

///.   Did  God  foreknoii)  and  decree  the  fall  of  man? 

Without  passing  any  censure  on  those  who  doubt,  or 
deny  this  doctrine,  let  us  appeal  to  the  law  and  the  tes- 
timony. 

1.  Did  God  foreknow  the  fall  of  man? 

Now  if  we  can  prove  that  the  First  Cause  has  created 
a  single  individual  foreknowing,  that  his  existence  would 
be  attended  with  sin,  then  he  may  create  a  greater  num- 
ber, and  may  have  created  our  first  parents  foreknow- 
ing the  event  of  their  fall.  A  single  instance  therefore 
demolishes  the  principle  which  we  oppose. 

By  the  prophet  Daniel,  God  foretells,  that  after  three 
score  and  two  weeks  shall  Messiah  be  cut  off.  It  is  ge- 
nerally admitted,  that  this  prophecy  refers  to  the  cruci- 
fixion of  the  Saviour,  and  that  it  predicts  the  precise 
time  of  its  accomplishment.  This  crucifixion,  and  the 
time  of  its  occurrence,  God  must  have  foreknown,  or  he 
fiould  not,  and  would  not  have  uttered  such  a  prophe- 
cy. This  public  murder  of  him  who  was  holy,  harm- 
less, undefiled,  and  separate  from  sinners,  is  by  all  ac- 
knowledged  to  be  a  sin;  God  therefore,  foreknew  the  ve- 
ry hour  on  which  an  exceedingly  great  sin  would  be 
committed.  But  as  this  could  not  be  done  without  a- 
gents,  he  foreknew  that  particular  men  would  at  this  ve- 
ry time  be  disposed  to  combine  in  its  perpetration. 
When  he  proclaimed  this  prophecy,  he  foreknew,  that 
Judas  would  betray  him,  Pontius  Pilate  with  the  Gentiles, 
and  the  people  of  Israel,  would  take  counsel  against  the 
Lord  of  glory,   the  soldiers  part  his  raiment^  cast  lots 


154 

lor  his  vesture,  and  pierce  his  side  with  a  spear;  and  fi- 
nally,  that  all  would  unite  for  the  commission  of  a  deed 
so  atrocious,  that  at  its  perpetration  the  guilty  earth  should 
tremble,  and  the  insulted  heavens  veil  their  glories  in 
the  mantle  of  night.  The  conduct  of  Judas,  is  foretold 
in  the  forty-first  Psalm;  Yea  mine  own  familiar  friend 
in  whom  I  trusted^  which  did  eat  of  my  bread,  hath  lif- 
ted up  his  heel  against  me.  Is  its  application  to  Judas 
doubted?  Hear  its  design  in  the  language  of  him  who  spoke 
as  never  man  spake:  /  speak  not  of  you  all;  I  know  whom, 
Ihave  chose?i;  but  that  the  scripture  may  hefulfilled:  Ht 
that  eateth  bread  with  me,  hath  lifted  up  his  heel  against 
me.  The  actions  of  the  people,  and  of  Pilate  were  also 
predicted  in  the  second  Psalm:  fVhy  do  the  heathen  rage, 
and  the  people  imagine  a  vain  thing?  the  kings  of  the 
earth  set  themselves,  and  the  rulers  take  counsel  togeth- 
er against  the  Lord  and  against  his  anointed.  If  it 
should  be  argued,  that  this  language  does  not  apply  to 
the  crucifixion  of  our  Lord,  the  refutation  is  found  in  the 
fourth  chapter  of  the  acts  of  the  Apostles,  in  the  inspi- 
red language  of  Peter  and  John:  ^'Who  by  the  mouth 
of  thy  servant  David,  hast  said,  Why  did  the  heathen 
rage  and  the  people  imagine  vain  things?  The  kings  of 
the  earth  stood  up  and  the  rulers  were  gathered  togeth- 
er against  the  Lord  and  against  his  Christ.  For  of  a 
truth  against  thy  holy  child  Jesus  whom  thou  hast  anoin- 
ted, both  Herod  and  Pontius  Pilate  with  the  Gentiles 
and  the  people  of  Israel  were  gathered  together  to  do 
whatsoever  thy  hand  and  thy  counsel  determined  before 
to  be  done.'' 

The  division  of  Christ's  raiment  by  lot  among  the  sol- 
diery, as  also  the  wound  inflicted  on  his  body  by  the 
speai',  are  distinctly  foretold.  In  the  twenty-second 
Psalm  it  is  said.  They  part  my  garments  among  theniy 
and  cast  lots  upon  my  vesture:  and  in  the  twelfth  chap- 
ter of  Zechariah,  they  shall  look  on  me  ivhom  they 
have  pierced.  If  the  reference  of  these  predictions  to 
the  Saviour  s  sufferings  be  disputed  the  fact  will  be  pla- 
ced beyond  all  doubt  by  an  a])pcal  to  the  testimony  of 
the  Apostle  John:  "They  said  among  themselves  let  us 


155 

not  rend  it;  but  cast  lots  for  it  whose  it  shall  be,  that  the 
scripture  might  be  fulfilled  which  saith:  They  parted 
my  raiment  among  them,  and  for  my  vesture  did  they 
cast  lots'' — ^^ And  again  another  scripture  saith,  They 
shall  look  on  him  whom  they  pierced/'  Now  all  these 
deeds  were  foretold  before  Judas,  Pilate,  the  people  of 
Israel,  and  the  soldiers  concerned  in  the  crucifixion, 
were  born.  Therefore,  when  God  created  Judas,  he 
foreknew  that  he  wovild  betray  the  Saviour,  when  he 
formed  Pilate  that  he  would  deliver  him  to  be  scourged 
and  crucified,  and  when  he  made  the  people  of  Israel 
and  the  soldiers,  that  they  would  rage  around,  part  his 
raiment  by  lots,  and  pierce  his  side  with  a  spear.  And 
if  he  created  these  men  foreknowing,  that  the  event  of 
their  existence  would  be  attended  with  the  commission 
of  so  horrible  a  sin,  he  may  also  have  created  our  first 
parents  foreknowing,  that  eating  the  forbidden  fruit 
would  be  the  certain  consequence  of  their  creation. 

Again  it  is  taught  in  the  Scriptures,  that,  known  un- 
to God  are  all  his  works  from  the  beginning*  of  the 
world.  This  text  implies  not  only  his  foreknowledge 
of  the  existence  of  the  creatures  comprehended  in  his 
works,  but  also  of  all  their  actions.  There  are  certain 
of  God's  works  connected  with  the  works  of  his  crea- 
tures as  antecedents  and  consequences  and  the  reverse. 
If  from  eternity  he  foreknew  that  he  would  create  the 
human  body  of  the  Saviour  as  a  consequence;  he  must  al- 
so coeternally  have  foreknown,  that  as  an  antecedent , 
man  would  fall,  and  that  an  incarnate  divine  Redeemer 
would  be  needed  for  his  recovery.  To  suppose  that 
God  would  determine  the  incarnation  of  his  only  begot- 
ten and  well  beloved  Son  without  foreknowing  some  end 
to  be  accomplished  by  this  act  of  humiliation,  is  an  im- 
plied denial  of  his  Infinite  Wisdom.  How  could  he  fore- 
know that  he  would  act  wisely  without  coevally  fore- 
knowing, that  he  would  act  in  reference  to  some  end? 
And  how  could  he  foreknow,  that  in  creating  the  hu- 
man body  of  the  Saviour,  he  would  act  in  reference  to 

•The  original  is  ap'aionoe  literally  from  eternity. 


156 

some  end,  unless  he  foreknew,  that  man  would  fall,  and 
an  incarnate  Saviour  be  needed?  Eating  the  forbidden 
fruit,  the  creature's  luork^  as  well  as  the  creation  of  the 
Saviour's  human  body,  his  own  worky  God  therefore  e- 
ternally  foreknew. 

And  finally,  if  it  be  conceded,  that  God  eternally  fore- 
knew all  his  works,  as  the  text  literally  teaches,  then  a- 
mong  other  things  he  foreknew  that  he  would  pronounce 
upon  our  first  parents  the  sentence.  Dust  thou  art  and 
unto  dust  thou  shalt  return;  ^m^  if  so,  he  also  foreknew, 
that  our  first  parents  would  sin  so  as  to  deserve  such  a 
curse.  To  determine  to  curse  them  without  foreknow- 
ing a  just  cause  for  the  execration,  would  have  been  to 
exercise  cruelty  as  well  as  folly. 

But  suppose,  it  should  be  granted  that  when  God  made 
Adam,  he  was  totally  ignorant  of  his  future  transgression; 
what  is  gained?  Is  God  any  less  the  author  of  sin,  or  man 
any  more  accountable? 

It  is  denied  that  God's  foreknowledge  of  Adam's  sin, 
can  by  any  logical  inference  imply,  either  the  one  or  the 
other;  but  if  the  contrary  were  true,  no  difliculty  is  re- 
moved by  a  denial  of  the  divine  prescience.  If  we  sup- 
pose that  Deity  when  he  made  Adam,  was  ignorant  of 
the  event  of  his  transgression,  still  he  was  as  much  A- 
dam's  Maker  as  he  would  have  been,  had  he  foreknown 
that  event;  and  he  was  as  much  the  author  of  his  liabili- 
ties in  the  one  case  as  he  would  have  been  in  the  other; 
and  as  sin  was  the  result  of  human  liabilities,  he  was  ag 
much  the  author  of  Adam's  sin  in  the  one  case  as  he 
would  have  been  in  the  other. 

And  if  on  either  supposition,  he  W2i/5/ be  considered 
the  Author  of  sin,  the  only  difference  is,  that  in  the  one 
case,  he  is  made  \\\Q,intelHii;cnt  author  of  sin,  and  in  the 
other,  the  ii(norant  Author  of  sin.  And  what  is  worst 
of  all,  according  to  the  opinion  of  those  who  say,  that 
God  ?/2/i>"/// have  foreknown,  but  tvou Id  not  foreknow, 
the  fall,  he  is  the  ivilfidly  iii;norant  Author  of  sin.  So 
that  the  advocates  of  this  theory  by  endeavouring  to  a- 
void  a  merely  supposed  difliculty,  run  so  far  to  th«  other 
^idc  as  to  fall  into  one  fearfully  reak 


157 

Nor  does  a  denial  of  the  divine  prescience,  increase 
Adam's  accountability.  The  theory  upon  which  this 
objection  is  made,  supposes  that  man's  accountability  a- 
rises  not  from  the  state  of  his  mind,  and  the  character  of 
his  actions  in  themselves;  but  from  the  agents,  or  the  cau- 
ses, which  either  directly,  or  indirectly,  produce  them. 
Upon  this  principle  it  matters  not  whether  we  say,  God 
foreknew,  or  did  not  foreknow,  the  fall  of  Adam.  On 
either  supposition  he  was  equally  the  author  of  Adam's 
liabilities;  and  as  of  these  his  sin  was  the  result,  he  is  by 
inevitable  inference,  the  Author  of  the  first  human  trans- 
gression. For  if  moral  turpitude  exist  not  in  the  nature 
of  dispositions  and  actions  themselves,  but  in  the  causes  or 
agents  from  which  they  either  directly,  or  indirectly,  a- 
rise,  whether  we  admit,  or  deny,  the  prescience  of  Dei- 
ty we  release  the  creature  from  all  guilt  and  leave  it  res- 
ting on  the  Maker. 

If  guilt  exist  not  in  the  nature  of  disposition,  and  the 
action,  which  is  the  expression  of  that  disposition;  but 
in  their  cause,  the  moral  turpitude  of  Adam's  coveting 
and  taking  the  forbidden  fruit,  consisted  not  in  the  co- 
vetous disposition,  which  desired  an  unlawful  object, 
nor  in  the  act,  which  carried  that  covetous  disposition 
into  execution;  but  in  their  cause.  Adam  in  believing 
the  serpent,  and  surveying  the  tree  as  good  for  food, 
pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make 
one  wise,  enlisted  his  appetite  for  food,  and  his  desires 
of  beauty,  and  wisdom,  all  principles  good  in  themselves 
and  useful  when  properly  directed,  around  the  banner  of 
an  unlawful  object;  and  thus  created  in  himself  this  cove- 
tous disposition,  developed  in  the  forbidden  act.  But 
if,  according  to  the  supposition,  moral  turpitude  consists 
not  in  the  nature  of  the  disposition,  or  state  of  mind  de- 
veloped by  unlawful  operations;  but  in  the  agents,  or 
causes  which  produce  it,  then  Adam  ivhile  producing 
in  himself  this  covetous  disposition  by  believing  the  ser- 
pent, and  surveying  the  forbidden  fruit,  was  guilty 
as  the  cause  and  not  afUrwards  as  the  subject  of  trans 
gression. 


158 

But  Adam,  until  he  produced  in  himself  this  covetous 
disposition,  was  as  he  came  from  the  hands  of  his  Ma- 
ker; therefore  Adam  as  the  cause  of  his  first  transgres- 
sion, was  more  guilty  as  he  came  from  the  hands  of  his 
Maker,  than  when  indulging  a  covetous  disposition^  and 
performing  an  act  of  disobedience!!! 

Again,  Adam  howev  er  the  cause  of  his  own  covetous  dis- 
position, and  his  disobedient  action,  was  not  the  cause  of 
his  own  existence,  or  of  any  original  state  or  liability,  con- 
nected with  his  existence.  The  Maker  was  the  cause  of 
all  these.  And  if  guilt  exist  in  the  cause,  and  not  in  the 
nature  of  the  effect,  the  guilt  of  Adam's  first  sin  must  be 
chargeable  on  God  as  the  cause  of  Adam's  existence  and 
liabilities.  Whether  he  became  intelligently  or  ignorant- 
/?/ guilty,  isa  matter  of  very  little  moment;  if  the  guilt  rest 
on  God,  the  creature  is  not  accountable.  So  that,  while 
it  is  admitted  as  true,  that  moral  turpitude  exists  not  in  the 
nature  of  that  state  of  mind  which  is  developed  by  for- 
bidden operations;  but  in  its  cause,  nothing  is  gained  in 
exculpating  (lod,  or  in  fixing  guilt  on  Adam  as  a  sinner 
by  denving  the  divine  prescience;  whilst  on  the  contra- 
ry, if  that  mischievous  principle  be  surrendered,  and 
the  guilt  of  such  a  stateof  mind  be  supposed  to  arise  sole- 
ly from  its  disconformity  to  the  nature  of  Deity  as  revea- 
led in  his  v/ill,  we  are  relieved  from  all  difficulty  in  vin- 
dicating the  ways  of  God,  and  in  justly  charging  the 
blame  of  disobedience  on  Adam,  at  once  its  subject  and 
its  author,  and  need  seek  no  relief  by  impugning  this  es- 
sential attribute  of  Jehovah.  The  objection,  that  the  di- 
vine foreknowledge  of  man's  first  disobedience  would 
destroy  or  lessen  Adam's  accountability  is  therefore 
groundless. 

If  God  did  not  foreknow,  when  he  made  man  what 
would  be  the  result  of  his  existence,  it  is  difficult  to  re- 
concile the  act  either  with  his  wisdom,  or  his  goodness. 

Wisdom  is  the  power  of  judging  rightly.  A  man  who 
would  make  any  piece  of  mechanism  without  knowing 
whether  or  not  it  is  adapted  to  any  purpose,  could  not 
rif^htly  judge,  that  hiso])crations  tended  to  any  end:  and 
so,  if  God  when  creating  man  was  ignorant  of  the  events 


159 

that  would  accompany  his  existence,  he  could  not  so  far 
as  we  can  see,  judge  rightly,  whether  to  create  him  or 
not:  and  he  must  therefore  have  made  him  without  judg- 
ing rightly  of  his  creation,  and  thus  have  acted  unwisely. 

The  object  of  goodness  is  to  promote  happiness.  But 
if  when  God  created  man,  he  foreknew  not,  whether  he 
would  remain  holy  and  happy,  or  sin  and  become  misera- 
ble, then  the  promotion  of  happiness,  the  proper  object  of 
goodness,  must  have  been  in  the  view  of  the  Creator,  a 
mere  peradventure,  and  no  more  probable  than  the  most 
exquisite  misery.  Not  therefore  the  one,  or  the  other, 
but  the  bare  uncertainty  of  the  one  or  the  other,  could 
have  been  the  object  of  his  creating  so  important  a  being. 
Where  then  the  goodness  displayed  in  that  creation,  o- 
ver  which  tJie  morning  stars  sang  together  and  all  the 
sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy? 

And  especially,  was  the  act  of  Deity  in  creating  man, 
destitute  of  both  wisdom  and  goodness,  if  he  chose  to  be 
ignorant  of  the  consequences  of  his  existence,  when  mere- 
ly by  preferring  knowledge  to  ignorance,  he  might  have 
foreknown  all  the  events  which  would  certainly  attend 
him  in  any  state  in  which  he  might  be  created;  andif  by 
this  knowledge,  he  might  have  chosen  to  create  him  in 
that  state  in  which  his  existence  would  be  attended  with 
less  sin  and  misery  than  it  now  actually  is. 

2.  Did  God  decree  the  fall  of  man? 
That  he  had  decreed  it  in  any  manner,  which  implies  his 
approbation  of  its  existence  as  sin,  is  at  once  denied  by 
the  holiness  of  his  character,  as  well  as  by  such  parts  of 
his  sacred  word  as  declare  sin  to  be  the  abominable  thing 
which  he  hates;  but  that  he  did  decree  it  in  such  a  sense 
as  to  determine  to  suffer  its  occurrence  in  his  eternal 
plan  of  the  moral  universe,  as  the  certain  imperfecticai  of 
the  best  pos?;ibIe  system,  is  as  certain  as  the  wisdom  and 
the  immutability  of  his  nature. 

His  eternal  foreknowledge  of  his  own  actions,  is  a 
proof  of  his  having  eternally  determined  those  actions. 
If  he  eternally  foreknew  them  as  certainly  to  eventu  ate, 
there  must  have  been  an  eternal  certainty  of  their  oc- 
currence; otherwise  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  ithey 


160 

could  have  been  eternally  foreknown  as  certain.  To 
speak  of  foreknowing^  an  event  as  certain,  which  is  in  its 
nature  uncertain,  is  little,  if  any  thing  better,  than  a  con- 
tradiction in  terms.  But  if  there  eternally  existed  a  cer- 
tainty of  all  the  divine  action*,  as  the  eternity  of  the  divine 
prescience  demonstrates,  there  must  have  eternally  been 
a  cause  of  this  certainty;  but  this  cause  could  have  eter- 
nally existed  no  where  but  in  the  nature  of  God.  Nothing 
but  he  is  absolutely  eternal.  And  as  in  his  nature  all  his 
actions  are  regulated  by  his  will,  so,  as  his  will  changes 
not,  the  certainties  eternally  foreknown,  must  have  eter- 
nally resided  in  his  will,  or  in  other  words,  in  his  volitions, 
determinations,  or  decrees.  He  therefore,  certainly  e- 
ternally  determined  all  his  own  actions. 

This  conclusion  is  perfectly  analogous  to  our  own  ex- 
perience. However  we  may  foreknow  the  actions  of  o- 
thers  simply  as  objects  of  knowledge,  without  making 
them  at  all  the  subjects  of  our  determinations,  or  giving 
them  in  any  way  a  place  in  our  plans:  yet  we  cannot 
foreknow  our  own  actions  without  also  predetermining 
their  performance.  Those  however  who  support  the 
contrary  doctrine,  suppose  that  although  loe  con  not; 
yet  thiit  God  can .  Their  opinion  is  however  unsuppor- 
ted by  any  one  fact,  or  any  one  text  in  the  Bible,  and 
is  contradicted  by  all  the  experience  of  our  foreknow- 
ledge as  connected  with  our  own  agency.  We  invaria- 
bly foreknow  our  own  deeds  only  when  we  also  prede- 
termine their  execution. 

If  then  the  Saviour,  who  is  also  God,  as  well  as  man^ 
eternally  decreed  all  his  own  actions,  among  others  the 
deed  of  suffering  the  pains  of  his  crucifixion,  he  must  al- 
so have  eternally  determined  to  perform.  It  has  just  been 
proved,  that  he  eternally  foreknew  that  Judas  would  be- 
tray him,  Pilate  deliver  him  to  be  scourged  and  crucified, 
the  [>eople  rave  around  in  tumultuous  accusation,  the  sol- 
diers part  his  raiment  by  lots,  and  cruelly  pierce  his  side; 
and  if  so,  he  mustalso  have  eternally  dctert^iined  to  suffer 
thera  to  execute  these  nefarious  deeds,  which  he  eter- 
nally foresaw,  if  left  to  the  exercise  of  their  natural  li- 
berty and  natural  power,  they  would  inevitably  perform. 


161 

It  is  a  mere  verbal  evasion  of  this  conclusion  to 
say,  that,  he  simply  foreknew  that  these  deeds  of 
darkness  and  death  would  certainly  be  executed,  but 
made  no  determinations  Vvith  regard  to  their  occurrence 
and  controul.  A  determination  to  suifer  them  implies 
that  their  occurrence  found  a  place  in  the  divine  plan. 

If  then^  God  created  Judas,  the  High  priest,  Pilate, 
the  Jews,  and  the  soldiers,  determining  to  suffer  their 
sinful  agency  in  the  crucifixion  of  the  Redeemer,  he  may 
also  have  created  Adam  with  all  his  disobedience  full 
before  him;  and  with  a  fixed  purpose  of  enduring  its  e~ 
vent;  and  if  he  may  have  formed  such  a  decree  the  in- 
vStant  before  he  created  him;  he  may  have  done  the  same 
at  any  imaginable  period  of  past  eternity.  The  with- 
holding of  his  creating  power,  would  have  prevented 
the  sin  of  our  first  parents,  as  well  as  all  the  unnumbered 
sins  committed  by  their  degenerate  children.  His  de- 
termination not  to  desist  from  that  creating  act,  involves 
in  itself  a  determination  to  endure  the  commission  of  that 
gin,  which  he  foresaw  would  inevitably  follow  as  a  con- 
sequence. This  doctrine  is  in  the  most  perfect  harmony 
with  the  Scripture,  which  teaches  us,  that  he  worketh 
all  things  after  the  cou7isel  of  his  own  will, 

IF.  How  is  the  fall  of  man  consistent  with  the  idea 
of  the  best  possible  system? 

In  the  solution  of  this  question,  it  is  important  to  dis- 
cover, whether  in  a  created  moral  universe,  sin  is  av^oi- 
dable  on  the  part  of  the  Creator.  If  the  subjects  of  the 
moral  kingdom,  might  have  been  so  created,  and  gover- 
ned, as  to  have  remained  forever  sinless,  and  happy,  then 
we  are  inevitably  conducted  to  the  conclusion,  ei- 
ther, that  the  accountable  universe  is  benefitted  by  sin, 
so  as  to  become  the  best  by  its  introduction  or  that  the 
Holy  Deity  has  chosen  its  ingress,  not  because  it  makes 
creation  best,  or  better ^  or  even  so  good;  but  solely  be- 
cause, he  prefers,  that  a  portion  of  his  creatures,  should 
be  sinful  and  miserable,  and  not  otherwise.  On  either 
supposition,  he  must  be  viewed  as  preferring  an  uni- 
verse, attended  with  a  certain  portion  of  sin,  misery,  and 


I6:e 

death,  to  one  entirely  exempt  from  their  intrusions  and 
their  ravages.  This  opinion  appears  to  be  directly  op- 
posed to  such  Scriptures,  as  declare  sin  to  be  the  abomi- 
nable thing  which  God  hates. 

According  to  the  conditions  of  either  of  these  hypo- 
theses, the  Supreme  Being  is  made  to  choose  the  very 
thing,  which  he  awfully  proclaims  to  be  the  object  of  his 
hatred.  If  such  be  the  legitimate  results  of  the  theory, 
which  supposes  a  sinless  moral  creation  to  be  properly 
within  the  dominion  of  Omnipotence,  there  is  reason  to 
question  its  truth,  and  more,  than  doubt  the  solidity  of  its 
foundations.  There  is  no  evidence  to  support  the  fab- 
rick,  except  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  omnipotence. 
But  who  knows^  that  to  give  direction  to  the  choice  of 
intelligent  and  voluntary  beings,  is  the  legitimate  object 
of  physical  omnipotence?  Is  it  said,  that  ^^omnipotence 
effects  in  the  sinner's  soul,  that  moral  change,  which  re- 
stores conformity  to  the  divine  image?  And  might  not 
that  same  energy  have  retained  that  conformity  in  our 
first  parents,  or  have  restored  it  as  soon  as  it  was  lost?'' 
So  far  as  this  may  be  considered  an  act  of  physical  omni- 
potence on  man's  moral  powers,  an  answer  in  the  affirma- 
tive is  undoubtedly  just;  but,  it  is  apprehended,  that 
while  in  the  act  of  regeneration,  God  thus  operates  on 
man's  moral  nature,  by  direct  acts  of  his  physical  ener- 
gies, it  is  essential,  that  in  governing  him  as  a  moral  a- 
gent,  he  should  address  his  powers  as  those  of  an  intelli- 
gent and  voluntary  being,  by  means  in  their  nature  en- 
tirely moral.  He  might  indeed  by  his  power,  have  sus- 
tained Adam  above  all  temptations,  strengthened  him  to 
resist  and  repel  them,  or  have  re-created  him  as  soon  as 
he  lost  his  pristine  conformity  to  his  Maker;  but  he 
would  not  then  have  governed  him  as  a  moral  subject. 
It  aiipears  essential  to  a  moral  agent  that  made  the  sub- 
ject of  law,  and  having  the  best  motives  to  obedience 
presented,  he  should  be  sustained  in  existence,  and  in 
the  natural  exercise  of  his  faculties,  and  that  he  should 
be  left  to  employ  his  understanding  and  choice,  without 
anv  "oreign  constraint  or  restrnint.  Adam  was  created^ 
a^id  a  law  given  him,  just  suited  to  his  nature  and  condi- 


163 

tion;  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  than 
shall  not  eat;  and  the  penalty  annexed: /or  in  the  day 
that  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die,  Satan  in- 
formed him  that  eating  he  would  not  die.  The  false- 
hood was  believed,  and  as  a  consequence^  the  act  of  dis- 
obedience performed.  By  an  act  of  his  power^  God 
might  have  convinced  Adam,  that  the  assertion  of  the 
Devil  was  a  falsehood.  He  might  at  once  have  enlarged 
the  capacity  of  his  intellect,  or  infixed  on  his  mind  an 
impression,  that  the  suggestion  was  untrue;  but  this 
would  not  have  been  leaving  man  to  the  natural  exer- 
cise of  his  understanding,  and  choice,  without  any  for- 
eign constraint;  and  therefore,  would  not  have  been 
governing  him  as  a  moral  being. 

To  have  secured  him  from  transgression,  by  elevating 
his  intellect,  would  have  been  nothing  less,  than  to  make 
him  the  possessor  of  infinite  knowledge.  Any  thing 
less  than  omniscience,  except  confirmed  by  moral  means, 
is  liable  to  err.  Angels  that  excel  in  strength,  mistook 
their  best  interest.  This  then  would  have  been  to 
change  man's  nature,  and  rank,  and  to  give  the  glory  of 
God's  omniscience  to  another,  which  is  as  impossible,  as 
that  there  should  be  more  Gods  than  one. 

And  in  every  case  of  temptation,  to  have  made 
on  his  mind  an  impression  of  the  falsehood  proposed, 
would  have  been  to  govern  him  not  as  a  rational  agent, 
by  addressing  his  reason,  but  as  an  irrational  animal,  by 
something  like  the  power  of  instinct. 

Although  therefore,  it  is  the  sole  operation  of  divine 
power,  that  renews  man,  dead  and  trespasses  and  in  sins, 
and  rectifies  the  derangement  produced  by  the  fall;  yet 
God's  dispensations  towards  him  as  antecedents  to  regene- 
ration— the  admonitions  of  judgment,  and  mercy,  presen- 
ted in  his  providence,  the  warnings,  and  exhortations  of 
his  word,  and  the  strivings  of  his  Spirit,  in  his  common 
operations,  all  demonstrate,  that  the  renewal  of  the  man, 
is  but  a  part  of  God's  moral  economy  If  it  be  one  part 
of  his  economy  to  do  this  deed  of  mercy,  it  is  al^^o  a  corres- 
ponding, but  another  distinct  part,  to  be  enquired  of  by 
the  house  of  Israel  to  do  it  for  them.     If  one  part  be  to  give 


164 

the  Holy  Spirit,  another  part  is  that  it  be  to  them  that 
ask  it;  and  if  men  ask,  it  must  be  because  they  are  ope- 
rated upon  by  moral  means  so  as  to  teel  their  guilt  and  to 
see  their  danger.  And  thus  men's  willingness  to  im- 
plore the  divine  mercy,  presented  in  the  Gospel,  pro- 
duced in  their  souls  by  the  convictions  and  alarms  of 
these  antecedent  dealings  of  God,  make  an  essential  part 
in  the  economy  of  the  moral  system.  So  also  it  is  ap- 
prehended as  man's  hopes  and  fears  are  now  addressed 
to  induce  him  to  bow  to  the  sovereign  mandates  of  the 
Gospel,  and  thus  to  obtain  the  restoration  of  his  Makers 
image;  Adam's  hopes  were  addressed  by  the  promises  of 
life  and  his  fears  by  the  threatening  of  death,  to  per- 
suade him  to  abstain  from  the  forbidden  fruit  and  thus 
to  preserve  in  his  soul  the  image  of  his  Maker.  In 
both  instances,  man  is  addressed  by  moral  means  and 
as  an  intelligent  and  voluntary  being;  in  the  one  to  re- 
tain, and  in  the  other  to  recover,  the  Maker's  image. 
And  who  can  prove  that  such  an  economy  is  not  in- 
dispensable to  the  very  nature  of  a  moral  system? 
And  if  it  be,  then  since  liability  to  err  in  moral  judg 
ment  isan  inevitable  imperfection  of  created  minds  when 
not  confirmed,  and  since  they  can  be  confirmed  only  by 
moral  convictions,  produced  by  examples  of  punishment 
for  disobedience;  and  since  no  such  examples  could  have 
been  exhibited  to  Adam  before  he  fell;  the  introduction 
of  sin  into  the  universe  was  unavoidable  on  tbe  part  of 
the  Creator:  Or  in  other  words,  sin  is  the  certain  though 
not  the  necessary  result  of  the  best  possible  moral  uni 
verse.  And  if  so,  the  option  of  Deity  was  not  between 
a  system  in  which  there  would  be  no  sin  and  one  like 
the  present  in  which  there  is  some,  but  between  that 
now  existing  and  others  in  which  there  would  have  been 
more  evil. 

If  then  God  foreknew  that  on  any  plan  of  moral  crea- 
tion and  of  moral  government  sin  and  misery  would  cer- 
tainly arise,  and  if  he  foreknew  that  with  all  these  cer- 
tain imperfections  of  a  created  moral  system,  there 
would  still  be  more  happiness  enjoyed  and  more  glory 
displayed,  than  without  it  would  be  possible^  then  cer- 


165 

tainly  to  determine  the  existence  of  such  an  universe 
upon  the  very  best  plan  would  be  a  determination  glori- 
ously consistent  with  infinite  benevolence. 

Suppose  that  Virgil's  hero^  .^neas,  after  Troy  was 
laid  in  ashes  by  the  victorious  Greeks,  knew  that  if  he 
remained  in  his  country,  he  and  his  companions  must  die  an 
inglorious  death,  but  that  if  they  adventurously  cast  them- 
selves with  their  navy  upon  the  waves,  they  would  find 
an  Italy,  and  enjoy  in  it  long  life,  with  freedom  and 
happiness.  But  suppose,  he  foreknew,  that  while  by 
this  adventure  they  would  as  a  company  redeem  their 
lives,  and  enjoy  happiness  and  honor,  and  that  the  re- 
verse would  be  their  fate  if  they  remained  hovering  a- 
round  the  ashes  of  Troy,  yet  that  some  individuals, 
known  to  him  by  name,  would  on  the  very  best  plan  of 
government,  mutiny  and  make  capital  punishment  ne- 
cessary as  a  means  of  preventing  all  the  others  from  in- 
surrection; but,  that  by  suffering  these  few  to  disobey, 
and  by  punishing  them  for  their  disobedience,  he  would 
ultimately  secure  order,  harmony,  and  happiness  among 
all  the  remainder  of  his  company. 

One  of  these  two  things  he  must  have  chosen;  either  to 
rem.ain  where  he  was,  and  undergo  a  disgraceful  death, 
or  encounter  the  difliculties  that  would  certainly  attend 
his  migration.  He  would  understand,  that  with  all  the 
evils  certainly  to  attend  the  latter,  it  was  almost  infinite- 
ly preferable  to  the  former. 

Then  he  might  wisely,  and  benevolently,  have  plan- 
ned, determined,  or  decreed,  to  prefer  the  latter  and  to 
suffer  the  resistence  of  the  rebellious  to  eventuate;  and  to 
punish  them  for  an  example  to  others. 

So  also  if  Deity  foresaw,  that  on  the  best  plan  of  moral 
government,  Adam  and  some  of  the  Angels  would  cer- 
tainly sin,  but  yet,  that  a  good  almost  infinitely  greater, 
would  arise  from  the  existence  of  a  moral  creation,  than 
would  otherwise  be  possible,  it  must  be  admitted  to  have 
been  wisdom  and  benevolence  in  Deity,  to  decree  the 
adoption  of  such  a  system  in  preference  to  none. 

Is  it  objected,  that  ^neas  ought  to  have  left  those 
whom  he  foresaw  to  be  certainly  rebellious,  and  to  de- 


166 

mand  capital  punishment  for  their  crimes,  and  to  have 
taken  none  but  such  as  could  have  been  foreseen  to  be 
orderly  and  obedient,  and  that  so,  if  Deity  made  any 
plan  of  moral  being,  it  ought  to  have  been  one,  in  which 
no  being  should  be  introduced  foreknown  certainly  to 
become  the  subjects  of  sin  and  the  objects  of  endless 
woe?  This  objection  takes  for  granted  what  the  suppo- 
sition denies.  As  it  is  believed  to  have  been  already 
proved,  that  on  the  best  plan  of  moral  being,  sin  will  find 
an  introduction:  so  in  the  illustration  it  has  been  suppo- 
sed, that  iEneas  could  not  have  selected  a  company  so 
virtuous,  but  the  general  good  would  eventually  demand^ 
that  some  of  them  should  be  capitally  punished.  It  is 
also  supposed,  that  he  foreknew  that  subordination  was 
to  be  maintained  among  his  men  only  by  suffering  the 
disobedience  of  the  offenders  to  eventuate,  and  by  pun- 
ishing them  for  their  crimes,  and  that,  therefore,  if  he 
should  leave  behind  him  those  whom  he  foresaw  if  taken 
would  become  justly  the  objects  of  capital  retribution^ 
others  without  the  impression  produced  by  a  survey  of 
their  disloyalty  and  its  penalty,  would  mutiny,  and  that, 
if  these  should  be  left,  others  would;  and  others,  and  o- 
thers;  so  that  the  result  must  be,  he  could  have  no  obe- 
dient companions,  unless  he  determined  to  suffer  the  wick- 
edness of  some  to  occur,  and  to  be  punished  for  an  example 
to  others.  As  according  to  the  supposition,  the  choice 
of  a  band  of  immaculate  companions  was  impossible,  his 
choice  would  have  been,  between  the  death  of  himself 
and  all  his  companions,  and  his  admitting  certain  ones 
of  them  in  the  service  of  his  expedition,  who  would  cer- 
tainly prove  disobedient.  All  must  acknowledge  that  the 
latter  would  be  far  preferable.  And  if  in  such  circum- 
stances, itvvoidd  have  been  good  and  wise  in  the  Trojan 
chief  to  determine  to  introduce  into  the  ch'cle  of  his  com- 
panions, some,  who  he  foreknew  would  become  disobe- 
dient and  require  the  infliction  of  capital  punishment;  so 
also  it  was  wisdom  and  goodness  in  Deitv,  to  introduce  into 
being  Adam  as  apart  of  the  best  possible  system,  although 
he  foreknew,  that  he  would  certainly  become  a  trans- 
gressor of  the  law,  and  the  subject  of  its  woful  and  ever- 
enduring  penalties. 


167 

AisOj  since  on  the  supposition,  that  in  the  best  mode 
of  government,  crime  could  not  be  excluded  from  the 
circle  of  ^Eneas'  best  chosen  companions,  it  was  better, 
that  he  should  not  only  know  all  the  events  of  his  expe- 
dition, but,  that  he  should  also,  determine  every  particu- 
lar, even  the  crimes  that  would  attend  it,  according  to 
the  best  possible  plan.  So  also  if  on  any  system  of  moral 
being,  and  moral  government,  some  sin  will  certainly  ob- 
tain a  place;  it  is  most  certainly  better,  that  Deity  should 
not  only  foreknow,  but  also  predetermine,  every  event, 
even  Adam^s  sin  itself;  so  that  it  should  eventuate  in  the 
least  evil,  and  in  the  greatest  good.  From  the  conside- 
ration of  this  subject  a  few  reflections  naturally  arise. 

1.  God  is  not  the  author  of  Jldam^s  sin.  He  created 
him  in  the  state,  and  governed  him  in  the  manner,  best 
adapted  to  prevent  his  aberration.  His  determining  to 
suffer  its  introduction  as  the  certain  imperfection  of  the 
best  possible  system,  no  more  involves  him  in  the  author- 
ship of  it,  than  does  his  foreknowledge.  His  merely  de- 
termining, by  any  act  of  his  physical  omnipotence  not 
to  hinder  its  occurrence,  could  surely,  no  more  pro- 
duce the  act,  than  could  his  bare  foreknowledge,  that  it 
would  certainly  happen  if  not  prevented. 

2.  Man  is  accountable  f 07' his  sin.  Demerit  resides 
in  the  nature  of  sin,  and  not  in  any  cause  immediate  or 
remote.  In  nature,  it  is  the  violation  of  the  righteous 
law  of  heaven,  and  therefore,  is  in  itself  the  very  essence 
of  demerit.  It  is  in  itself  the  abominable  thing  which 
God  hates,  and  is  not  so  because  it  arose  from  this  or  that 
particular  cause,  whether  more  or  less  direct.  And 
man  is  justly  guilty,  because  sin  in  itself  really  deme- 
ritorious, becomes  apart  of  his  veryconstit'ition.  He  is 
guilty,  because,  he  is  the  agent,  who  commits  it;  and  not. 
because  he  was  led  to  commit  it  from  this  or  that  cause; 
or  when  existing  in  a  state  of  sin  he  is  guilty,  because  he 
is  the  subject  of  a  state  forbidden  by  the  law  of  God,  and 
not  on  account  of  his  having  been  introduced  into  this 
state  by  this  or  by  that  means.  And  because  sin  is  in  its 
nature  opposed  to  God.  and  ill  deserving,  and  because 
in  its  effects,  it  is  deleterious,  God  has  associated  its  com- 


168 

mission  with  the  feelings  of  remorse  in  the  conscience  of 

man. 

Thus  the  authorship  and  the  guilt  is  man's;  and  God  is 
justified  when  he  speaks,  and  clear  when  he  judges.  If 
God  decreed  the  best  possible  plan  to  prevent  man's  first 
sin,  and  decreed  to  suffer  its  existence  only  as  that  abo- 
minable thing,  that  ivould  not  be  prevented  by  the  best 
moral  means,  surely  then,  it  is  all  Adam's  and  his,  justly 
all  the  guilt  and  all  the  penalty. 

3.  Ab  man  has  any  reason  of  complaint  on  account 
of  Ids  representation  by  Adam.  It  has  been  shown  in 
the  discoui^e  immediately  preceding  this,  that  the 
chance  of  all  mankind  for  standing,  was  by  the  repre- 
sentation of  Adam,  better  than  it  could  have  been,  had 
all  have  been  left  to  stand  for  themselves  on  the  ground 
of  probationary  obedience.  But  especially,  sliould  eve- 
ry mouth  be  stopt  from  murmurs,  and  be  employed  in 
praises,  since  infinite  mercy  has  provided  a  Mediator, 
who  having  already  become  a  propitiation,  and  thus 
thrown  all  Adam's  children  upon  the  arms  of  mercy,  as 
fairly  offers  himself  to  become  an  atonement  and  redemp- 
tion; and  as  ftiirly  offers  his  Holy  Spirit  to  sanctify  and 
restore  the  lost  conformity  to  the  Maker  s  image,  as  he 
offered  life  to  Adam  as  the  consequence  of  his  abstaining 
from  the  forbidden  tree.  Who  art  thou,  O  man,  that 
replies t  against  God?  Instead  of  uttering  murmurs  a- 
gainstthe  constitution  of  the  infinite  Jehovah,  and  instead 
of  cavilling  at  those  most  sacred  truths  of  his  word,  which 
reveal  thy  present  moral  wretchedness,  and  thine  expo- 
sure to  unending  ruin,  look  upon  the  remedy,  the  re- 
deeming Jesus.  Instead  of  complaining,  that  the  world 
should  become  involved  in  sin,  by  the  one  act  of  Adam, 
Behold  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the 
word.  Instead  of  murmuring  at  your  condition,  and  pe- 
rishing in  your  ruin,  look  to  him  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the 
ends  of  the  earth. — Amen. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER 


Vol.  1.  JAjYU^RY,  1828.  N^  8. 


THE  BEST  POSSIBLE  SYSTEM. 

My  counsel  shall  stand,  and  I  will  do  all  my  pleasure.  Isaiah 
dvi.  10. 

For  thou  art  not  a  God,  that  hath  pleasure  in  wickedness;  neither 
«an  evil  dwell  with  thee.   Ps.  v.  4. 

To  proclaim  the  immutability,  the  eternity,  and  the 
holiness  of  the  divine  counsels,  the  raptured  prophet 
wrote,  and  the.  siveet  psalmist  of  Israel  sung.  In  recor- 
ding by  the  hand  of  the  prophet,  the  first  part  of  our 
text,  God  proclaims  his  plan,  as  unchangeable.  My  coun- 
sel shall  stand;  and  as  the  one  of  his  choice,  Itvilldo  all 
my  PLEASURE.  And  since,  according  to  the  in- 
spired psalmist^s  sacred  song,  the  Holy  One  has  no  plea- 
sure in  tvickednesSf  and  evil  cannot  dwell  with  him;  the 
doctrine  most  obviously,  and  naturally,  drawn  from  these 
texts,  taken  together,  is,  that  in  the  creation  and  govern- 
raent  of  his  rational  and  accountable  subjects,  God  has  a 
plan,  embracing  all  the  parts,  and  descending  to  all  the 
particulars  in  the  universe,  and,  that  this  plan  is  one  of 
■:he  best  possible,  to  encourage  holiness  and  to  prevent 
sin. 

The  design  of  this  and  the  following  discourse,  is  to 
■explain,  and  prove  this  doctrine,  and  to  consider  its  prac- 
tical consequences. 

In  the  explanation,  it  is  proper  to  premise,  thatGod^s 
glory — the  exercise  and  exhibition  of  his  natural  and  mo- 
ral perfections — is  the  ultimate  end  of  all  the  divine  plans 
and  operations.  For,  the  Lord  hath  made  all  things  for 
himself;  yea  the  wicked  for  the  day  of  evil.  Whether, 
therefore,  ye  eat  or  drink,  or  whatsoever  ye  do,  do  all  to 
the  glory  of  God.  And  as  this  is  true  now;  so  it  is  pre- 
sumed ever  to  have  been  true  through  eternity  past;  and 
ever  to  continue  the  same  throughout  eternity  to  come. 
Now,  as  the  ultimate  end  is  eternally  one,  so  God^s  sys- 
tem of  operations  for  the  attainment  of  this  end,  is  eter- 


170 

tiallv  one.  He  did  not  foresee  certain  conditions,  and  on 
this  foresight  clioose  his  system,  nor  yet  choose  his  system, 
and  fro  n  this  choice  foreknew  all  its  consequences;  but 
with  a  never-beginning  and  a  never-ending  choice, 
and  with  a  never- beginning  and  a  never  ending  know- 
ledge,* coexisting  in  the  eternal  state  of  the  unchangea- 
ble Mind,  he  knows  all  things  possible  and  impossible, 
and  chooses  that  system  of  possible  things,  which  has  e- 
ver  existed,  and  will  forever  exist. 

Thus  the  divine  purpose  is  supposed  to  be  adopted  with- 
out any  reasoning  or  com))arison  between  this  and  other 
systems,  which  might  have  been  possible,  had  they  been 
made  the  objectsof  the  supreme  choice.  Such  a  process 
it  would  be  a  kind  of  blasphemy  to  impute  to  him,  whose 
intuitive  omniscience  supersedes  the  necessity  of  reason- 
ing. For  since  a  process  of  raciocination  implies  chan- 
ges, as  the  mind  passes  over  the  successive  steps  of  com- 
parison, such  a  supposition  would  rob  God  of  hisimmuta- 
bility.t  Yet  it  is  maintained,  that  the  system  actually 
chosen,  is  one  of  the  very  best,  that  possibly  could  have 
been  selected  to  promote  righteousness  and  to  oppose  sin. 
That  no  process  of  comparison  preceded  its  adoption,  is 
no  proof,  that  it  is  not  one  of  the  very  best.  The  perfec- 
tion of  God's  nature  intuitively  directs  him  to  the  best,  and 
therefore,  there  can  l)e  no  possible  motive  to  suspend  his 
preference  or  to  direct  his  mind  to  any  other  as  an  ob- 
ject of  choice. 

As  natural  liberty  enters  into  the  very  essence  of  a  mo- 
ral creat  ;re,  and  as  in  finite  beings  unconfirmed,  this  im- 
plies in  its  very  terms,  a  liability  to  transgression^  as 
well  as  to  continued  obedience,  it  remains  yet  to  be 
proved,  that  in  any  system  of  finite  and  created  moral 
brings  under  any  form  of  government,  consistent  with 
their  nature,  there  will  not  rpr/fl^m///,  though  not  iiecesa- 
rjliu  be  a  greater  or  a  less  degree  of  moral  evil.  In  any 
such  a  system,  some  beings  tvi II  sin.  And  thus,  some 
de'^n'ee  of  evil,  is  believed  to  be  a  certain  imperfection, 
which  will  accompany  any   such   system  of  beings — an 

'*S«e  Chvisfian  Prencbcr  No.  1.  r^^-t.  8,  30.  +See  Chr;r/.ian  Preacher  No. 
1  Noie  B    p,  :iU      $N').  1.  pp.  11,  I?. 


171 

imperfection,  however^  which  results  not  from  the  neces- 
sity, but  from  the  liberty  of  their  nature. 

According  to  this  view  of  the  moral  system,  it  is  con- 
stituted upon  the  condition,  that  the  volitions  of  the  crea- 
ture,  are  to  be  left  uncoerced  by  any  direct  operations 
of  Omnipotence.  This  perfection  of  Deity  is  employed 
in  sustaining  the  creature  in  existence,  and  in  the  exercise 
of  that  liberty  essential  to  his  moral  nature;  in  perform- 
ing wonders  of  judgment  and  mercy,  as  motives  to  ad- 
dress the  hopes  and  the  fears  of  his  accountable  subjects, 
thus  to  encourage  them  to  holiness  and  to  restrain  them 
from  sin;*  and  also  in  7'e instating  his  own  image,  lost  by 
thefall-\  in  such  of  the  human  family,  as  in  the  exercise 
of  their  natural  powers,  so  regard  the  teachings  and  ad- 
Hionitions  of  his  works,  providence,  word,  and  common  o- 
perationsof  his  spirit,  as  importunately,  and  persevering- 
ly  to  seek  his  grace  and  mercy;{  but  never  by  direct  and 
compulsive  operations  to  regulate  volition,  as  when  exer» 
cised  in  the  transformation  and  translation  of  matter. 
And  therefore,  it  is  supposed,  the  utter  exclusion  of  sin 
from  the  moral  universe,  falls  not  properly  within  the 
province  of  omnipotence;  and  also,  that  since  Deity  cre- 
ates and  governs  all  things  in  the  best  possible  manner  to 
promote  righteousness  and  resist  sin,  and  after  all  this, 
creatures  will  sin,  every  degree  of  evil  in  such  a  system, 
will  not  be  excluded  by  any  thing,  that  can  be  done  by 
him  consistently  with  his  character  as  the  Supreme  Crea- 
tor and  moral  Governor.  And  if  all  be  done  by  him,  that 
can,  consistently  with  his  sustaining  such  a  character, 
and  yet  transgression  and  suffering  find  place,  through  the 
abused  agency  of  the  creature,  there  is  no  departure,  ei- 
ther from  truth  or  reverence,  in  maintaining,  that  in  a 
moral  system,  some  degree  of  both  are  unavoidable  on  the 
part  of  the  Creator — On  his  part,  he  creates  and  governs 
in  the  best  possible  manner  to  exclude  them  from  his 
works;  on  the  part  of  the  delegated  freedom  of  the  crea- 
ture, however,  they  enter,  reign,  and  desolate.  With 
this  natural  liberty,  the  relation  which  he  himself  has 

^See  No.  3.  pp,  52,  53-     jSee  No.  5,  p.  114.     ^See  Nq.  2.  p,  35, 


17:^ 

constituted^  forbids  him  as  Creator  and  mora!  Governor, 
to  interfere;  therefore,  they  are  unavoidable,  so  far  as  he 
is  concerned,  unless  he  had  wholly  dispensed  with  a  mo- 
ral creation.*  And  since  on  the  best  plan  of  moral  being, 
sin  will  not  be  wholly  excluded,  the  Holy  one  has  only 
endured  its  existence,  as  the  certain  imperfection  of  tr.e 
best  intelligent  and  accountable  system.  And  since  it 
will  find  an  introduction  into  his  moral  kingdom,  as  the 
Most  Wise,  Holy,  and  Merciful  Creator  and  Ruler,  h.v 
exercises  his  pleasure  in  wisely  choosing,  and  powerfully 
controuling  the  mode  of  its  existence;  so  as  to  make  it  the 
unwilling  means  of  promoting  good.f  Thus  as  the  cer- 
tain imperfection  of  the  best  created  moral  system  he 
chooses  to  suffer  its  intrusion;  because  by  the  existence 
of  an  universe  of  which  it  is  the  certain  though  not  the 
necessa?y  concomitant,  a  greater  amount  of  happiness,  will 
be  enjoyed  by  creatures  and  a  more  glorious  display  of 
the  Creator's  perfections  be  made,  than  would  otherwise 
be  possible.  And  hence  rather  than  there  should  be 
no  moral  creation,  God  determines  and  chooses  to  en- 
dure the  ^r?>/and  dispkasio^e  occamoned  by  the  fall 
of  man  and  angels,  by  the  sins  of  the  old  world,  of  Pha- 
raoh in  not  letting  the  children  of  Israel  go,  and  of  the 
Jews  in  crucifying  the  Lord  of  glory;  and  in  fine,  by  all 
the  sin  and  misery,  v/hich  tlie  natural  liberty  of  men 
and  angels  has  ever  produced. 

This  view  of  the  best  moral  system,  it  may  be  seen, 
differs  essentially  from  that  advocated  by  Leibnitz,  Woll^ 
President  Edwards,  and  their  foUov/ers.  Theirs  sup- 
poses, that  the  omnipotence  of  Deity,  might  have  forever 
prevented  the  introduction  of  sin  into  the  moral  universe; 
but,  that  the  divine  glory,  and  the  good  of  the  whole  in- 
telligent creation,  required  its  exlsteiict;:  a?id  therefore, 
he  so  constructed  and  governed  the  system  as  to  procure 
the  amount  of  evil  which  actually  obtains.  T/iis  on  the 
contrary  asserts  that  sin  is  a  positive  evil  to  the  universe, 
and  unnecessary  as  a  means  to  promote  the  divine  glory, 

•No   1.  p.  18.  nlso  p.  3'1  Note  C.  No.  Z.  p.  48.  No,  3  54,  55,    fNo.  3. 
pp  59,  61.     No,  5.  pp.  105.  70r. 


17o 

and,  tliat  it  has  obtained  an  introduction,  neither  through 
the  choice  nor  the  power  of  God;  but  entirely  by  the  a- 
buse  of  the  natural  liberty  of  the  creature. 

It  now  remains  to  prove,  that  God  has  a  plan,  reaching 
to  every  being  and  event,  within  the  compass  of  eternity; 
and  iinally,  that  this  plan  is  the  best  possible. 

A  part  of  this  subject,  will  be  deferred  to  another  dis- 
course. At  present  it  is  only  proposed  to  consider  the 
existence^  the  immutability,  ?iY\6.t\i^ eternity  of  this  plan. 

1.  God  has  a  plan  according  to  which,  he  creates  and 
governs  the  universe.  This  is  not  only  reasonable;  but  it 
is  asserted  in  the  Scriptures.  TJlwm  he  did  foreknow, 
he  also  did  predestinate  to  he  conformed  to  the  image  of 
his  Son.  According  as  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him,  he^ 
fore  the  foundation  of  the  ivorkL  that  we  should  be  holy 
and  without  blame  before  him  in  love.  If  however,  it 
be  imagined,  that  this  predestinating  and  choosing  some 
men  to  holiness  or  conformity  to  the  image  of  Christ,  is 
no  positive  proof,  that  God  predestinates  and  chooses 
every  being,  and  event,  the  answer  is,  that  to  this  scrip- 
ture proof  of  the  divine  determinations  in  ordaining  men 
to  holiness,  or  in  other  words,  to  conformity  to  God,  is 
also  added  the  inspired  declaration,  that  he  ivorketh  all 
things  after  the  counsel  of  his  oivn  will.  And  again, 
he  doeth  his  ivillin  the  armies  of  heaven  and  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  earth,  and  none  can  stay  his  hand  or 
say  unto  him,  what  doest  thou?  And  besides  this,  we 
have  the  testimony  of  the  four  and  twenty  elders,  who 
falling  dow^n  before  him,  that  sittethon  the  throne  in  the 
heavens,  and  say.  Thou  art  worthy  O  Lord  to  receive 
glory  J  and  honour,  and  power,  for  thou  hast  created  all 
things,  and  for  thy  PLEASURE,  they  are  and  ivere 
created.  Now^  if  language  can  be  taken  as  the  symbol 
of  thought,  all  things  exist  in  exact  accordance  with  the 
pleasure  of  God. 

2.  This  plan  is  immutablt.  In  God  there  is  no  vari- 
ableness neither  shadow  of  turning,  and  he  is  the  same, 
yesterday,  to  day  and  forever.  Nor  is  there  any  cause, 
either  in  scripture  or  reason,  why  these  texts  should  not 


174 

be  understood  in  their  most  obvious  signitication.  Some 
passages  in  the  Bible  appear  indeed  to  stand  literally  oppo- 
t*ed  to  these:  we  sometimes  read,  that  God  repents.  The 
form  of  the  word  in  the  Hebrew  Testament  of  which  our 
word  repent  is  a  translation,  used  in  relation  to  this  subject, 
signifies  both  to  console  and  to  repent.  VVIien  used  in 
the  latter  sense  it  either  signifies  a  change  of  mind  or 
displeasure  of  mind  and  is  translated  in  the  Septuagint 
vei'sion  of  the  Old  Testament  by  different  Greek  words, 
corresponding  to  both  these  significations.  The  text  in 
which  it  is  said,  that  it  rel)entedthe  Lord^  that  he  had 
made  man  upon  the  earthy  and  it  s:rieve.d  him  at  the 
hearty  would  he  more  literally  rendered,  the  Lord  ivas 
caused  to  be  displeased^^-  bfj  means  of  his  havins;  made 
man  upon  the  earthy  and  he  grieved  kmii^elf  at  the  heart. 
As  a  consequence  of  having  made  man  upon  the  earth, 
&?!!  was  introduced  into  the  world,  and  being  so  much 
opposed  to  his  holy  nature,  it  always  occasions  him  dis- 
])leasure  and  grief.  Yet  since  no  moral  creation  ivill 
exist  without  some  evil,  and  such  a  creation,  with  all  its 
iriiDerlections  and  consequent  evils.,  aii'oi*ds  more  happi- 
ness and  displays  more  glory,  than  without  it  would  be 
possible,  God  determines  to  endure  the  displeasure  and 
grit'f.  occasioned  by  the  comparaticehj  Utile  evil,  for  the 
sake  of  tiie  positivehf  greater  good.  The  text  taken  m.ost 
literal! V,  says  not,  that  God  changed  his  vaind  in  relation 
to  his  \vorkma»>ship;  but  simply,  that  tliis  workmiirisliij) 
orrasioned  liini  displeasure  and  grief)  without  intimating 
the  least  interruption  of  his  general  plan,  'iliough  his 
jiresent  plan  occasioned  him  some  grief;  vet  he  did  not 
Y,ish  to  alter  it;  because,  any  other  would  Ov-casion  him 
as  nuich:  and  most  others  per!);i|)s  more:  and  no  inteiii- 
li-enV  universe  to  enjoy  his  goodness  and  reflect  his  gloi*}-, 
would  ])i*obably  grieve  and  disj>lease  him  more,  than  all 
the  sin  and  misery,  which  human  and  angelic  agency  la 
the  abuse  of  liberty  has  ever  ])roduced. 

There  jire  liowever  other  texts  in  which  this  Hcbrev/ 
word  usually  rendered  iaco  Kuglishby  \\\i^iQvia repeat)  is 


»'Vlic  Grefk  w-.rd  in  the  SepMu^iat    it.  LuetUutiicthe   Ijom  Enthiiinco,  I 
-ir  >voke  to  aj-i^^irr  ur  d»ij)lca.tiurt . 


175 

translated  in  the  Septuagint  by  the  GveekmetarnoeOy  sig- 
nifying properly  a  cliange  of  mind;  as  in  this  text — If 
that  nation  against  whom  I  have  pronounced;  turn  from 
their  evil^  Iivill  repent  (change  my  mind  J  from  the  evil, 
that  I  thought  to  do  unto  ihem.^  Here  an  absolute 
change  of  mind  in  God,  is  not  asserted;  butonly  a  change 
towards  this  people.  He  repents  of  the  evil  threatened 
to  them.  His  holy  nature  opposed  to  sin,  always  directs 
evil  against  the  wicked.  But  here  the  wicked  are  sup- 
posed to  change;  they  no  longer  occupy  the  place  to- 
wards which  a  holy  God  directs  the  shafts  of  his  displea- 
s^'.re:  but  now  tread  the  court  over  which  waves  the  ban- 
ner of  peace.  M  hey  leave  the  vales  darkened  by  the 
clouds  of  his  justice,  and  stand  upon  the  mountaiiis  en- 
lightened by  the  sunshine  of  his  mercy.  And  thus  though 
his  mind  absolutely  changes  not;  yet  it  varies  its  relations 
towards  them,  just  as  the  mountain,  standing  by  the  river 
side,  to  the  passenger  borne  along  by  the  stream,  appears 
at  first  before  him;  then  opposite;  and  at  last,  it  withdraws 
in  his  rear.  The  mountain  stands  firm  on  his  moveless 
base;  the  traveller  only  has  varied  his  situation;  and  yet* 
the  local  relations  of  the  mountain  towards  the  man,  have 
materially  changed.  And  the  same  is  true  of  other 
texts  of  this  class.  Such  modes  of  speech,  therefore  de- 
note no  changes  in  the  divine  intentions — For  any  thing 
that  they  teach,  it  may  have  been  the  everlasting  design 
of  the  King  Eternal,  at  certain  times  and  in  agreement 
with  certain  changes  in  the  character  of  his  creatures,  to 
vary  his  relations  and  cor<duct  towards  them;  not  because 
he  changes;  but  because  they  change.  Now  since  the 
intentions  of  Jehovah,  exist  in  the  state  of  his  infinite 
jnind;  if  he  change  not,  the  state  of  his  mind  changes  not; 
and  so  neither  can  his  intentions  alter,  and  therefore,  in 
truth  his  counsel  shall  stand, 

3.  God^s  plan  is  eternal.  If  it  be  conceded,  that  he 
nniv  has  a  plan,  this  plan  is  eternal.  Because,  its  adop- 
tion implies  determination,  and  every  new  determination 
a   new  state  of  mind,  and   every  new^  state  of  mental 

*  J'.' vein i all  xv'ri  8.. 


•I7(> 

eonditon   a  change  in  God;  and  if  so,  lie  could  not  sa\ 
with  truth,  I  change  not. 

Again  an  eternal  plan  is  argued  from  God's  eternal 
prescience.  Known  unto  God  are  all  hh  loorks  from 
the  beginning  of  the  roorlcl  [\wovQ  literally  froa  eterni- 
ty). Now  an  event  foreknowu  a:^  certainly  to  happen, 
must  have  its  future  existence  infallibly  secured;  Ijecause, 
otherwise  it  is,  in  truths  an  uncertainty,  and  in  truth, 
it  ca n  only  be  foreknown  as  such.  To  foreknow  a  u  uncer- 
tainty  to  be  a  certainty  is  as  maul  festl}' a  contradiction  as 
to  know  a  falsehood  to  be  a  truth,  or  a  thing  to  be  and  not 
to  be  at  the  same  time.  If  therefore  God  foreknew  from  all 
eternity,  that  he  would  send  his  Son  into  the^world,  it  must 
have  been,  because,  coeternally  with  this  foreknowledge, 
lie  had  determined  to  send  him,  or  at  least,  because,  he 
had  determined  to  determine  to  send  him:  For  if  his  mis- 
sion was  undetermined  1,  it  wa'^,  while  it  remained  thus, 
uncertain  and  therefore  could  only  be  foreknown  as  such. 
To  say,  that  whilst  it  was  undetermined  and,  therefore  an 
uncertainty,  God  forekiiew  it  as  a  certainty,  is  just  asser- 
ting in  other  words,  that  he  foreknew  that  which  he 
knew  might  be  d.  falsehood,  to  be  certainly  a  truth. 

Nor  is  this  dilViculty  surmounted,  as  it  is  sometime> 
supposed  to  be,  by  saying,  that  the  future  existence  of  an 
event,  may  have  been  eternally  certain,  although  God 
had  not  determined  it  from  all  eternity.  For  although  the 
Supreme  determinations  of  themselves,  are  not  the  agents 
or  causes  of  future  events;  yet  in  these  determinations, 
God  caiises  the  certainty  of  these  future  events. 

The  supposition  contained  in  the  argument  is  that  events 
may  be  eternally  certain^  timugh  not  eternally  decreed. 
Now  if  this  certainty  existed  from  all  eternity,  it  must 
have  had  a  cause  from  all  eternity;  and  this  cause  must 
have  existed  either  in  the  intentions  of  God,  the  events 
themselves,  or  the  creatures  that  produced  them. 


177 

But  neither  the  events  themselves,  nor  yet  the  crea- 
tures that  produced  them,  are  eternal;  so  that  from  eter- 
nity it  existed  not  in  them.  If  therefore,  it  existed  not 
in  the  state  of  the  Eternal  mind  from  all  eternity,  it  had 
no  existence  from  all  eternity;  and  from  all  eternity, 
must  have  been  causeless,  or  have  been  the  cause  of  it- 
self, which  is  plainly  impossible. 

To  avoid  misapprehensions,  it  is  proper  to  add,  that 
when  speaking  of  God's  causing  in  his  determinations, 
the  certainty  of  future  events,  language  is  employed  on- 
ly in  accommodation  to  popular  usage.  Strictly  spea- 
king, an  eternal  certainty  exists  m,  and  coexists  with, 
his  eternal  determinations;  these  determinations  exist  in, 
and  coexist  with^  the  state  of  his  eternal  mind;  and  the 
state  of  his  eternal  mind  coexists  with,  himself;  and 
therefore  a  certainty  involved  in  the  state  of  his  eternal 
and  uncaused  Being,  is  itself  eternal  and  uncaused'^  yet, 
since  that  certainty  could  not  eternally  exist,  apart  from 
God  J  in  a  kind  of  figurative  sense,  God  may  be  said  to 
PMUse  that  certainty.  But  the  argument  divested  of  all 
figure  is  simply  this:  Since  the  certainty  of  a  future  e- 
vent,  apart  from  the  eternal  and  unchangeable  state  of 
the  divine  existence,  can  not  be  eternal,  it  can  not  be 
known  from  all  eternity.  But  the  scriptures  teach,  that 
every  being  and  event,  and  therefore  the  certainty  of 
every  being  and  event,  are  known  from  all  eternity;  and 
consequently  since  this  certainty  could  not  possibly  exist 
from  all  eternity,  in  any  other  way,  it  must  have  existed 
in  the  intentions  of  the  divine  mind,  and  these  intentions 
must  have  been  eternal. 

But  Arminians,  who  admit  the  doctrine  of  the  divine 
prescience,  say,  that  by  some  power,  beyond  our  com- 
prehension, which  can  dart  through  all  uncertainties 
and  descry  things  afar  off  as  certain,  although  they  are 
uncertairij  God  foreknows  all  possible  things.  This  is 
just  asserting,  that  he  has  the  power  of  knowing  a  thing 
to  be  certain,  which  is  admitted  to  be  uncertain;  that  a 
thing  will  certainly  be,  which  certainly  may  never  he; 
and  that  a  thing  vAll  certainly  be  t?'iie  which  may  cer- 

23 


178 

iainly  be  false.  But  perhaps  some  good  reasoning  can 
he  advanced,  which  will  demonstrate  this  proposition, 
strange  as  it  appears,  nevertheless  to  be  true.  This  we 
liave  a  right  to  expect.  Our  common  sense,  which  dic- 
tates, that  a  thing  can  not  be  foreknown  as  certain^  until 
it  is  certain^  ought  not  to  be  contradicted  without  clear 
demonstration.  Now  what  is  the  process  by  which  our 
common  sense  is  shown  to  be  in  an  error?  Has  God  in  the 
Scriptures  revealed  himself  as  possessing  this  apparently 
absurd  power? — No.  Revelation  on  this  subject  is  silent. 
What  then  is  this  demonstration?  Simply  this:  All  things 
are  not  eternally  decreed  or  eternally  made  certain. 
He  however  eternally  foreknows  all  things  thus  uncer- 
tain as  certain;  and  therefore,  possesses  the  power  of  e- 
ternally  foreknowing  things  uncertain  as  certain. 

It  is  a  first  axiom  in  Logick,  that  one  of  the  premises 
must  contain  the  conclusion,  and  the  other  must  show, 
that  the  conclusion  is  contained  in  it;  in  this  demonstra 
tion  however,  both  the  major  proposition,  asserting, 
that  all  things  are  not  eternally  decreed,  or  eternally 
made  certain;  and  the  minor  announcing,  that  Deity  eter- 
nally foreknows  uncertainties  as  certain,  are  taken  for 
granted;  and  what  is  this,  but  assuming  the  conclusion  to 
be  true?  If  the  premises  which  contain  the  conclusion 
be  assumed,  the  conclusion  itself  is  assumed.  And  if  so, 
this  professed  demonstration  turns  out  to  be  but  a  beggiiii^; 
the  very  question,  that  ought  to  have  been  proved.*  If 
then  inspiration  be  not  mistaken  in  proclaiming.  Known 
unto  God  are  all  his  works  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world,  the  plan  of  God  is  eternal. 

Arminians  however  fre(piently  admit,  that  so  far  as 
consequences  can  be  legitimately  drawn  from  metaphysi- 
cal reasoning,  the  doctrine  of  an  eternal  and  divine  plan 
in  creating  and  governing  the  universe,  would  appear 

•If  it  should  be  snicl,  that  ahhough  Gnd  did  not  from  all  eternity  foreknow 
the  ciriainty  of  future  events  as  cf<?r;ia//v  existing;  yet,  he  eternally  foreknew, 
that  this  certainty  would  ultiviately  exist;  nothing  is  gained  Because  this 
is  only  asserting,  fhat  fr~.m  eternity,  he  foreknew  the  certaivty  of  iht  certainty 
of  these  even's:  and  the  question  again  arises,  Whence  the  cau^^e  of  thec- 
t9rnal  certainty  oi  their  certainty?  It  must  have  eternally  existed  in  the 
State  of  the  divine  mnid,  or  had  some  cause  without  God. 


179 

to  be  true;  but  affirm,  that  when  they  submit  their  rea= 
son  to  the  guidance  of  the  divine  word,  they  are  irresis- 
tibly conducted  to  the  contrary  conclusion.  But  on  ex- 
amining  their  ideas  on  this  subject,  it  is  found,  they  sup- 
pose, this  doctrine  necessarily  denies  the  liberty  of  man 
and  makes  God  the  author  of  sin;  and  is  therefore  oppo- 
sed to  the  Bible,  which  teaches,  that  God  has  no  pleasure 
in  the  death  of  the  wicked^  and,  that  the  only  reason, 
why  the  wicked  are  not  gathered,  is  because  they  will 
not.  But  since  the  doctrine  here  advocated,  is  that  so 
far  from  interfering  with  the  liberty  of  the  moral  creation, 
it  is  a  part  of  God's  plan,  that  accountable  creatures  shall 
he  free;  and  that  so  far  from  making  God  the  author  of 
sin,  one  of  the  very  best  possible  plans  has  been  eternally 
chosen  by  him  to  prevent  sin,  it  most  obviously  follows, 
that  in  the  present  case,  these  hackneyed  objections  fall 
lifeless  to  the  ground,  and  will  be  recognized  as  wholly 
inapplicable  by  all,  but  such,  as  are  either  too  weak  or  too 
prejudiced  to  reason.  Except  these  however,  argument 
professed  to  be  scriptural,  against  this  doctrine  there  is 
jione.  There  being  thus  no  arguments,  either  from  rea- 
son  or  revelation,  legitimately  opposed  to  this  doctrine, 
the  only  question  now  is,  whether  by  interpreting  lan- 
guage in  its  most  literal  and  obvious  signification,  can  it 
])e  deduced  from  the  Bible? — We  say  by  interpreting 
language  most  literally,  and  obviously;  because,  if  any  o- 
ther  course  be  adopted,  the  Scriptures,  or  any  other 
book,  may  be  tortured  so  as  to  affirm,  or  deny,  any  thing, 
that  the  imagination,  the  weakness,  the  wickedness,  or 
predjudices  of  men  may  invent;  and  thus  cease  to  be  guides 
to  those,  who  would  be  conducted  by  them,  to  the  temple 
of  truth.  The  literal  meaning  of  a  word  always  stands 
first;  and  in  the  interpretation  of  language,  can  never  be 
departed  from,  until  such  reasons  be  found,  as  say,  that  it 
7nust  be  understood  figuratively;  and  when  such  reasons 
are  perceived  to  exist,  as  decide,  that  it  must  be  under- 
stood figuratively;  then  all  things  equal,  the  meaning  nea- 
rest the  letter,  or  least  figurative,  is  to  be  preferred  to 
one  farther  from  the  letter,  or  more  figurative;  conse- 
quently, when  a  word  can  not  be  understood  strictly  lite- 
ral, wx  are  to  interpret  it  as  nearly  so  as  we  can. 


180 

Regulated  by  this  principle,  which  must  be  to  all,  ob- 
vously  just,  let  us  examine  what  proof  our  doctrine  finds 
in  the  Bible: 

Knownunto  God  are  all  his  ivorks  f?^o?72  the  hegimiins^ 
of  the  worlds  or  from  eternity.  Now  his  foreknowledge, 
and  his  predestination,  are  so  coupled  together  by  the 
apostle  Paul,  as  to  intimate,  that  they  are  coexistent — 
IVhom  he  didforeknoxo^  he  ALSO  (not  afterwards)  did 
predestinate.  For,  if  they  be  not  coexistent,  then  there 
must  have  been  a  period  w^hen  he  foreknew  some, 
whom  he  did  not  predestinate. 

Again,  e/^s  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him  hef or  et  lie  found  a- 
lion  of  the  worlds  that  we  should  be  holy  and  ivithout 
blame  before  him  in  love.  This  text  is  literally  render- 
ed from  the  original.  It  is  admitted,  that  taken  by  it- 
self, it  does  not  say  certainly,  that  this  choice  was  made 
from  all  eternituj  but  it  does  say  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world — before  time  began,  and  therefore,  from  at 
least  a  part  of  eternity;  and  as  it  is  not  said  hou)  longhe- 
fore  the  foundation  of  the  world,  it  no  more  literally 
means  ?ipart,  than  the  z^'/io/e  of  the  duration  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world.  It  will  be  admitted  even  by 
an  opponent,  that  this  choosing  was  included  in  the  de- 
termination, /A«/  the  Gentiles  should  he  fellow  heirs 
and  of  the  same  body  with  the  holy  apostles  and  pro- 
phets; and  the  partakers  of  God^s  promise  in  Christ  by 
the  Gospel,  called  a  mystery;  which fromthe  beginning 
of  the  ivorld  [or  ap'ton  aionon,  most  literally  from  eter- 
nities] hath  been  hid  in  God:*  and  this,  accord i7ig  to  the 
eternal  pur fjose  [or  kata  prothesin  ton  aionon,  literally 
according  to  the  purpose  of  eternities,!]  which  he  pur- 
posed in  Christ  Jesus  Our  Lord.  %  Here  this  mystery — 
the  calling  of  the  Gentiles   as  well  as  the  Jews — accor- 


•Eph.  iii.  5,  6. 

fit  is  an  objection  among  the  weakest  of  the  weak,  to  say,  that  because 
this  mystery  is  reported  in  the  filrh  verse  of  this  chapter  to  have  been  hid 
from  a^f'S.we  must  understand  tffe;7i/</e.y  hereto  sij^nifv^  agrs  or  geiier  at  to7i5 — 
If  it  was  hid  from  ttennthi,  bv  the  axiom  that  a luA^/e  includes  all  the  parts,, 
it  must  have  been  hid  from  a^^c  . 

:|Eph.  iii.  IL 


181 

Sing  to  the  eternal  purpose  of  him  that  worketh  ail  things 
after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will,  existed  from  ail  eterni- 
ty, and  consequently  this  choosing^  to  holiness  included 
in  this  mystery  must  also  have  existed  from  eternity  ac- 
cording to  his  eternal  purpose.  Now,  if  the  Greek 
word  aionon  in  these  passages  properly  signifies  eternity, 
the  proof  is  complete.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  although  he 
wishes  to  limit  the  word  in  these  places  to  the  ages  of  the 
Jewish  dispensation,  yet  frankly  acknowledges,  that  ^^the 
grammatical  meaning  oith^worAi^everduringov endless 
duration^^ — a  candid  confession  on  his  part,  that  the 
theological  system,  which  he  advocates  does  not  strictly 
agree  with  ^^the  proper  grammatical  meaning^'  of  the 
Bible.  This  ^^grammaticaP'  decision  of  Dr.  Clarke,  is 
worthy  of  a  scholar,  whatever  he  may  be  as  a  divine. 
It  is  confirmed  by  authorities  unbiased  by  our  theologi- 
cal controversies  and  who^e  classical  knowledge  of  the 
Greek  language  nothing  but  ignorance  can  dispute. 
Philof  says,  that  in  aion  nothing  is  past  or  future;  but 
in  its  very  nature,  it  is  one.''  By  Aristotle^  aion  is  des- 
cribed as  ^^embracing  a  duration  beyond  which  there  is 
nothing;'^  and  ^^the  interminable  duration  and  infinitude 
of  all;"  and  also,  as  derived  from  aei^  ever,  and  einai^ 
to  be;  and  thus  as  signifying  everbeing. 

With  this  athorized  application  of  aion  before  us,  other 
texts  may  be  introduced  to  prove  the  eternity  of  God's 
plan.  JK'^ow  to  him  that  is  of  power  to  stahlish  you  ac- 
cording to  my  Gospel,  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ 
according  to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery  ivhich  teas 
kept  secret  since  the  world  began  [kronois  aioniois,  du- 
ring eternal  times].  Whether  this  mystery  be  under- 
stood to  mean  the  whole  Gospel  plan,  or  only  that  part 
of  it,  which  relates  to  the  Gentiles;  yet  it  is  conceded  to 
be  a  plan  which  the  apostle  declares  to  have  been  hid 
during  the  eternal  times.  As  the  word  aionios,  has  been 
proved  and  admitted  properly  and  grammatically  to 
mean  eternal,  the  only  question  now  to  be  decided,  is 
whether  it  is  here  to  be  understood  literally  or  figuratively. 

*Kph,  i.  4,     tin  Libcro  de  illundo.     ^De  Corlo  lib  9. 


182 

The  word  is  here  indeed  in  connexion  with  KROA^OSy 
usually  translated  time;  and  on  account  of  this  associa- 
tion, it  may  be  supposed,  thatitis  not  to  be  literally  inter- 
preted. Since  time  properly  must  have  both  a  begin- 
ning and  an  end,  eternal  times  may  be  imagined  to  be  a 
contradiction.  But  this  difliculty  vanishes  into  empty 
?pace  when  on  approaching  it  we  find,  that  such  an  au- 
thority as  Aristotle  employs  Kronos  as  synonomous  with 
duration.  He  teaches  us,  that  aion  [eternity]  embra- 
(^es  Kronon  apeiron  [endless  duration]  on  this  authority 
we  may  venture  to  give  as  a  legitimate  rendering  of  the 
words  eternal  durations  instead  of  eternal  times.  If  it 
j^hould  be  objected,  that  the  words  are  here  found  in 
the  plural,  and,  that  a  plurality  of  endless  duration,  is  a 
plurality  of  absurdity,  the  answer  is,  that  among  the  an- 
cient classic  writers  generally,  and  espeeially  among  the 
writers  of  the  Scriptures,  nothing  is  more  customary, 
than  to  substitute  the  plural  number  for  the  singular. 
Tiiat  the  plural  is  sometimes  used,  when  no  meaning 
diflercnt  from  the  singular  is  intended,  may  be  seen  from 
tlie  following  texts;  ^^But  Israel  shall  be  saved  in  the 
1  .ord,  with  an  everlasting  salvation;  ye  shall  not  be  a- 
shamed,  nor  confounded,  world  without  end.*  And 
they  that  be  wise,  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the 
firmament;  and  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness,  as 
stars  for  ever  and  ever.''  |-  The  word  everlasting  and 
the  phrase  7vorld  without  end  in  the  first  text,  are  ex- 
pressed in  the  Hebrew  by  the  plural  of  olam  [eterni- 
ties]; but  are  rendered  in  the  Septuagent  by  aion,  sin- 
gular [eternity].  The  phrase  ^^for  ever''  in  the  second 
text,  is  in  the  Hebrew  olam.  singular  [eternity];  but  is 
rendered  in  the  septuagent,  eis  tons  eiionas.  })lural  [to  e- 
ternities].  These  cases  are  indisputable  proof,  that  the 
plural  and  the  singular,  are  sometimes  interchangeably 
nsed,  when  no  difference  of  signification  is  designed. 

Again,  God  is  said  to  save  us — ^^not  according  to  our 
works:  but  according  to  his  own  purpose  and  grace, 
which  was  given  to  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the\vorld 


^Isaiah  xiv.   17.     fDar.  xii. 


183 

began. ^^  Before  the  ivvrld  began,  is  in  the  original /?rd 
kronon  aionion.  [literally  before  eternal  duration]. 
Some  critics  say  that  this  phrase  ought  to  be  rendered, 
the  time  before  the  ages  of  the  Jeivish  dispensation,  be- 
cause, before  eternal  duration  involves  a  contradiction. 
But  however  anomalous  it  may  appear^  precisely  the 
same  kind  of  language,  is  employed  by  the  Septuagent 
in  the  eighth  chapter  of  Proverbs,  where  the  wisdom  of 
God,  which  all  agree  was  from  eternity ,  is  personified. 
The  phrase  from  everlasting  in  the  twenty- third  verse, 
in  the  Hebrew  ma-olam  [from  eternity],  is  by  the  se- 
venty translated  pro  aionon  [before  eternities],  whicli 
renders  it  entirely  certain,  that  in  their  estimation,  pro 
aionon,  is  one  way  of  expressing  eternity.  Now  as  aion 
and  hronos  aionios,  have  been  shown  to  convey  the  same 
extent  of  idea,  so  also  must  />ro  aionon  and  pro  kronon 
aionion.  If  then  the  former,  in  Prov.  viii.  23,  be  pro- 
perly translated  Froin  everlasting,  as  none  can  dispute; 
why  should  not  the  latter,  in  11.  Timothy  i.  9,  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  same  latitude  of  signification? 

Although  it  be  admitted,  that  the  word  aion  is  frequent- 
ly used  to  denote  the  age  of  man,  a  dispensation,  the  du- 
ration of  the  world,  and  perhaps  other  finite  periods;  yet 
from  the  authorities  already  quoted,  it  is  clear,  that  its 
literal  meaning,  is  eternity;  and  this  signification,  or  the 
nearest  to  it  allowed  by  the  connexion  of  the  word  and 
the  scope  of  the  passage  in  which  it  is  found,  is  the  sense 
in  which  it  ought  always  to  be  understood;  otherwise  lan- 
guage ceases  to  be  the  vehicle  of  thought. 

Though  aion  naturally,  is  the  symbol  of  eternity;  yet 
when  it  is  said;  Jls  he  spake  by  his  prophets  since  the 
world  began  [ap'aionos],  it  is  plain,  that  the  word  can  not 
here  be  understood  in  its  native  sense;  because  the  pro- 
phets have  spoken  only  since  the  creation  of  the  world. 

Again,  when  our  Saviour  speaking  of  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost,  declares,  that  the  man  guilty  of  this  sin, 
shall  not  be  forgiven,  neither  iyi  this  world  [en  touto 
aioni],  neither  in  the  world  to  come  [en  to  mellonti],  aion 
is  found  associated  with  committing  sins,  and  enduring 

*U  Tim,  1.  9. 


184 

punishment;  facts  which  the  scriptures  invariably  repre- 
sent as  belonging,  the  former  to  sinners  in  the  present 
life,  and  the  latter  to  them  in  the  life  to  come;  and  there- 
fore, to  understand  it  here  to  mean  any  thing,  but  the 
present  and  the  future  state  of  man,  would  be  totally  to 
disregard  the  scope  of  the  passage,  and  the  most  obvious 
signification  of  almost  every  other  v/ord  in  the  text. 

But  in  the  texts,  which  we  have  quoted  to  prove  the 
eternity  of  God's  plan  of  the  universe  what  in  the  scope, 
or  connexion,  or  letter  to  forbid,  tliat  aion  should  not  be 
taken  in  all  the  extent  of  its  native  latitude? — Nothing. 
The  only  imaginable  reason,  tliat  can  be  rendered  for  the 
unwearied  labour  of  certain  critics  and  theologians,  in 
these  texts  to  narrow  down  the  unlimited  meaning  of  the 
term,  is  because,  in  the  expanse  of  its  native  signiiication, 
it  is  death  to  the  peculiarities  of  the  Arminian  system. 
A  fact  however,  that  rises  to  all  the  power  and  dignity 
of  a  demonstration,  that  the  peculiarities  of  this  s)^stem 
are  at  variance  with  the  most  obvious  interpretation  of 
some  parts  of  the  Bible. 

All  this  inveterate  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  the  e- 
ternity  of  the  divine  plan,  arises,  no  doubt  in  many  cases, 
from  an  honest,  although  we  can  not  say  an  enlightened 
conviction,  that  it  makes  man  a  mere  machine  and  God 
the  author  of  sin;  and  from  a  strong  desire  of  obviating 
these  difliculties.  But  these  clifficulties  are  only  imagi- 
nary. They  arise  from  entertaining  unscriptural  as  well 
as  unreasonable  notions  with  regard  to  the  nature  of  the 
divivine  determinations.  Ah^eady  it  is  believed  to  be 
proved  in  the  course  of  this  work,  that  Deity  may  have 
an  eternal  plan,  and  yet  not  be  the  author  of  sin,  or  in  the 
least  interfere  with  the  freedom  of  the  creature.  And 
this  for  the  very  simple  reason,  that  his  plan  is,  that  the 
creature  s /mil  be  free  and  the  best  possible  means  shall  he 
employed  to  prevent  sin.  Now  the  demonstration,  that 
this  doctrine  impugns,  by  any  legitimate  consequence, 
either  the  holiness  of  God  or  the  natural  liberty  of  the 
creature  remains  yet  to  be  exhil)itcd;  and  it  may  be  ad- 
ded that  no  stronger  proof,  than  bold  vociferous  assertion  is. 
anticipated. 


185 

But  suppose  these  objections  were  real  instead  of  ima- 
ginary, still  the  Arminian  system  annihilates  no  difficul- 
ty,  which  adheres  to  the  most  ultra  Calvinism.  He  in- 
deed conceals  the  difficulty  from  the  unobserving  and 
the  superficial;  yet  he  whose  careful  feet  tread,  and 
whose  scrutinizing  eye  penetrates,  every  apartment  of 
this  edifice,  whose  front  is  so  carefully  swept  and  gar- 
nished, will  ultimately  find  the  unclean  spirit,  sometimes 
associated  with  seven  others  worse  than  itself. 

Suppose  it  to  be  a  doctrine  of  ultra  Calvinism,  that  God 
created  a  certain  portion  of  the  human  and  angelic  hosts 
with  an  eternal  purpose  of  their  being  sinners;  and  of  ma- 
king them  throughout  eternity,  the  miserable  objects  of 
his  vindicatory  justice;  and  therefore  formed  them  after 
such  a  manner,  placed  them  in  such  a  state,  and  employed 
upon  their  minds  such  a  coercive  influence,  as  to  secure 
the  exact  amount  of  sin  and  consequent  misery,  which  he 
desired,  what  is  gained  by  adopting  the  Arminian  system? 

The  Arminian  says  ^^.strictly  speaking  there  is  no  fore- 
knowledge'^ any  ^^more  than  afterknowledge  with  God; 
but  all  things  are  known  to  him  as  present  from  eternity 
to  eternity.'' 

Now  according  to  this  representation,  he  eternally 
views  all  things  and  events,  either  as  certainly,  or  con- 
ditionally, to  exist  and  happen. 

In  the  first  place,  suppose,  that  he  eternally  views 
them  as  certain.  Then,  seated  on  the  throne  of  eternity 
high  and  lifted  up,  he  beholds  the  lake  burning  with  fire 
and  brimstone,  filled  with  human  souls  and  angelic  spirits 
bound  in  the  chains  of  darkness;  and  the  smoke  of  their 
torments  ascending  with  the  voice  of  their  wailing  forever 
and  ever,  as  the  certain  consequence  of  sin;  and  sin  as  the 
ceiHain  consequence  of  men  and  angels  formed  in  a  par- 
ticular manner  and  placed  in  a  particular  State;  and  fi- 
nally, these  men  and  angels  thus  formed  and  thus  placed, 
as  the  certain  consequence  of  his  oivn  choosing  to  form 
and  place  them  thus.  So  that  he  views  all  this  sin  and 
auffering,  as  arising  from  the  certainty,  that  he  himself 
yjili  choose  to  form  creatures  with  the  very  Ijabilites,  and 

24 


186 

to  place  them  in  the  very  conditions,  which  will  certain 
ly  produce  the  full  amount  of  sin  and  sullering  commit- 
ted and  endured.  Now  what  difference  whether  this 
choice  be  made  from  all  eternity  or  only  innnediately  be- 
fore the  formation  of  the  creature,  since  the  liabilities  and 
circumstances  foreseen  as  productive  of  sin  and  destruc- 
ticn,  were  selected  by  the  Creator  himself,  before  the 
creature  had  existence?  If  God  had  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  the  wicked,  why  at  the  moment  oi' creation^  any 
more  than/ro/?z  a/l  ttetniity,  did  he  choose  to  create  men 
and  angels  with  liabilities,  so  as  certainly  to  become  sin- 
ners, and  the  certain  subjects  of  eternal  suffering? 

But  suppose,  from  all  eternity  God  beheld  all  things 
conditionally.  Here  he  saw  the  burning  lake  with  all  the 
unnumbered  myriads  of  impenitent  men  and  sinning  an- 
gels eternally  before  him,  griped  with  their  chains  and 
writhing  in  their  fires,  for  ever  and  ever,  to  he  certain, 
upon  the  condition,  that  there  should  be  men  and  angels 
that  would  sin;  men  and  angels  that  would  sin,  upon  the 
condition,  that  they  should  be  formed  with  certain  lia- 
bilities, and  be  placed  in  certain  circumstances:  and  fi- 
nally, men  and  angels  th\is  formed,  and  thus  placed,  upon 
condition,  that  he  himself  would  choose  to  form  and  place 
them  thus.  Suppose  all  this  foreknowledge  to  have  re- 
mained conditional  in  the  eternal  mind,  until  that  pe- 
riod in  duration  arrived,  when  he  created  men  and  an- 
gels; and  tJien,  in  clioosing  to  create  them  unth  the  par- 
ticular liabilities,  and  in  the  particular  circiunstances, 
which  he  viewed  as  certainly  the  antecedents  to  their 
sins  and  miseries,  he  chose  the  very  condition  on  which 
all  the  others  depended.  Now  wliat  though  all  these 
things  through  a  great  part  of  eternity,  were  uncertain; 
since  by  the  choice  of  the  Creator  himself,  they  were  ren- 
dered certai'iu  soon  enough  to  produce  all  this  imagined 
miscliief,  which  he  is  supposed  to  liave  foreseen,  to  be  the 
certain,  though  the  con ditio7ia I  consequence  of  his  choice? 
And  what  though  they  were  conditional,  since  God  se- 
lected the  very  condition  on  which  li|i  foresaw  all  the  rest 
would  certainly  turn? — So  that,  in  this  matter,  the  prin- 
<'ipal   difitrence  between  the  ultra    Calvinist   and  th^* 


187 

conditional  Arminian^  appears  to  be  simply  this:  the 
former  supposes,  that  God  chose  his  whole  system  from 
all  eternity,  and  the  latter,  that  he  chose  the  condition  on 
which  he  foresaw  all  the  other  conditions  would  certain- 
ly turn,  at  some  advanced  period  in  eternity;  perhaps 
just  before  the  creation  of  the  world.  But  if  God  had  no 
pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  why,  either  from  e- 
ternity  or  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  did  he  choose 
either  the  whole  system,  or  the  conditioti  on  which  he 
foresaw  the  whole  system  would  turn? — As  the  Arminian 
supposes,  that  he  eternally  knew  all  things;  and  conse- 
quently all  things  within  the  compass  of  his  own  power, 
why,  unless  he  have  delight  in  the  iniquities,  the  bur- 
nings, the  groans,  and  the  wailings  of  the  guilty  and  the 
miserable,  did  he  not  choose  that  condition,  which  he 
knew  would  not  be  followed  with  such  wicked  and  woful 
consequences?  In  fine,  how  is  he  any  less  the  author  of 
sin  by  choosing  a  condition,  on  which  he  foreknew  all 
the  other  conditions — some  wicked  and  woful— would 
certainly  turn,  than  by  choosing  the  whole  system  at  once, 
without  any  conditions? — And  how  is  he  any  less  the  au- 
thor of  sin  by  choosing  this  conditional  system  of  certain 
sin  and  misery  at  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  not  from 
all  eternity?  Why  choose  it  at  all,  either  conditionally y 
or  unconditionally,  in  tiine  or  eternity'^ 

It  is  however  alledged,  that  Arminianism  supposes, 
that  God  in  creating  his  moral  subjects  foresaw  that  they 
would  sin  freely;  but  ultra  Calvinism,  that  he  coerces 
them  to  sin,  and  that  thus  the  former  recognizes  the  li- 
berty of  man;  but  the  latter  denies  thatlibepty. 

Then  the  difference  is  only  this:  the  former  supposes, 
that  God  chose  to  create  moral  beings  in  that  state  of  na- 
tural freedom,  which  he  eternally  saw  to  be  the  certain 
condition  on  which  would  turn  all  the  sin  and  suffering 
ever  to  be  perpetuated  and  endured  on  earth  and  in  hell; 
and  the  latter,  that  God  chose  to  create  moral  beings  in 
such  a  state  and  govern  them  in  such  a  way  as  infallibly 
to  secure  the  same  guilty  and  miserable  consequences. 
Or  more  concisely,  ultra  Calvinism  supposes,  that  God 
has  chosen  to  create  and  govern  his  moral  subjects  so  that 


188 

they  shall  sin;  and  Anninianism,  that  he  has  chosen  to 
create  and  govern  them  so  that  they  will  sin.  Or  per- 
haps, as  there  is  no  Calvinism  so  ultra  as  to  deny  human 
liberty  in  every  sense,  it  would  be  more  proper  to  say, 
that  the  one  supposes,  that  God  has  chosen  to  create  and 
govern  his  accountable  creatures  so  that  they  shall  sin 
freely;  and  the  other,  that  he  has  chosen  so  to  create  and 
govern  them  that  they  infallibly  imll  sin  freely. 

The  partition  between  ultra  Calvinism  and  Arminian- 
ism,  so  far  as  regards  making  God  the  author  of  sin,  is 
as  thin  as  the  diameter  of  a  hair.  In  the  one  case  he  is 
supposed  to  choose  a  certainly  ivill  sin;  and  in  the  other, 
a  certainly  shall  sin.  But  if  he  be  a  God,  that  has  no 
pleasure  in  wickedness,  why  not  chuse  to  create  and  go- 
vern the  universe  in  adopting  such  a  condition  as  could 
be  foreseen  neither  with  a  certainly  shall  sin,  nor  with  a 
certainly  ivill  si7i;  but  with  a  certainly  720  sin? 

And  if  it  be  imagined,  that  God  created  the  moral  uni- 
verse, knowing  that  creating  it  as  he  did,  it  would  be  the 
condition  on  which  so  much  rebellion  and  misery  would 
be  decided,  but  without  determining  or  choosing  to  cre- 
ate it;  this  is  supposing,  the  act  of  God,  by  which  he  cre- 
ated all  the  intelligent  armies  of  the  heavens  and  the 
earth,  to  have  been  like  the  movements  of  the  brute  mat- 
ter, without  intelligence  or  design;  and  thus  to  have  been 
as  unmeaning  and  as  merciless  as  the  reach  of  the  fiery  arms 
of  the  god  Moloch  to  receive  the  devoted  infants;  and  as  the 
grasp  by  wiiich  he  embraced  them  to  his  burning  bosom. 

Again,  if  it  should  be  alleged  that  when  God  created 
men  and  angels,  he  chose  to  render  all  future  events  con- 
cerning them  contingent;  and  not  to  know  what  would  be 
the  certain  results;  this  is  adopting  a  position  in  itself  in- 
capa])le  of  ivny  proof:  and  yet,  directly  denied  by  such 
scriptures  as  teach,  that  known  unto  God  are  allhisivorks 
from  the  beginninij^  of  the  irorhh  and  that  he  has  made  all 
his  works  in  wisdom;  and  as  fully  as  the  sternest  Calvinism, 
it  implicates  the  Holy  one  with  the  authorship  of  sin.* 

The  last  argument  for  the  eternity  of  the  plan  of  God's 
moral  system,  is  the  consequences  to  which  the  contrary 

•See  No  1  note  B  pp  31  3"^: 


189 

hypothesis  legitimately  conducts  us.  It  is  intuitively  ob- 
vious, that  where  no  determinations  are  made,  there  is  no 
plan  adapted,  if  therefore  God  has  not  determined  every 
being  and  event  in  the  universe,  every  being  and  event  is 
not  embraced  in  his  plan,  and  then  he  has  an  universe 
stupendous  indeed,  but  in  part  without  a  plan. 

The  universe  is  one  and  will  continue  in  progress 
throughout  eternity  to  come;  if  there  be  any  thing  there- 
fore, now  undetermined,  which  will  however  happen  or 
exist  in  future,  the  universe  is  now  in  part  without  a  plan. 
If  the  actions  of  men  are  not  all  determined,  they  are  not 
all  embraced  in  God's  plan,  and  then  the  universe  is  in 
part  without  apian.  If  there  ever  was  a  period  since  cre- 
ation began  in  which  there  was  a  future  being  or  event 
undetermined,  then  the  universe  was  in  part  without  a 
plan. 

Now  to  suppose  there  is  a  single  appendage  viewed  by 
the  eye  of  omniscience  as  belonging  to  his  own  universe, 
to  which  his  determinations  have  given  no  appropriation, 
or  assigned  no  meaning,  appears  like  more  than  indirectly 
implicating  the  only  Wise  God  with  the  possibility  of  folly. 
Shall  the  writer,  who  would  deface  his  own  well  written 
page  with  unappropriated  characters,  or  the  orator  who 
would  intersperse  his  speech  with  unmeaning  sounds,  be 
justly  charged  with  folly,  and  yet,  shall  we  say,  that  God 
strew^s  the  expanse  of  his  harmonious  universe  with  un- 
intended events  and  unmeant  beings  and  still  not  im- 
pugn his  infinite  wisdom? 

If  from  eternity,  the  Divine  being  has  had  no  plan, 
which  reaches  every  event  in  the  universe;  and  if  all  his 
determinations  are  conditional,  he  must  either  have  had 
no  designs  at  first,  or  found  them  constantly  thwarted. 
To  suppose,  that  he  created  the  moral  universe  without 
any  design,  appears  too  preposterous  to  be  for  a  moment 
admitted.  And  if  there  be  any  intention  admitted  to 
have  existed  in  the  infinite  mind  on  the  subject  of  crea- 
tion, next  to  his  own  glory,  must  have  been  their  happi- 
ness. He  then  designed  to  create  moral  beings,  that 
they  might  be  happy;  behold!  after  he  had  designed 
them  for  happiness,  man  and  numbers  of  the  angels  fell, 


190 

and  a  great  link  in  the  chain  is  broken.  On  the  foresight  of  this  dis- 
aster he  determines  to  let  a  portion  of  the  fallen  angels  lie  in  the  pit 
into  which  by  transgression  they  had  fallen,  there  to  endure  unspeak- 
able and  unterminable  woe;  but  resolves  to  give  his  only  begotten  and 
well  beloved  Son  wMth  the  full  purpose  of  saving  the  whole  human 
race.  But  here  again  his  design  is  thwarted.  He  discovers,  that  all 
will  not  believe.  On  the  foresight  of  the  faith  of  one  part  of  the  hu- 
man race,  and  of  the  infidelity  of  the  other,  he  lastly  determines  to 
save  the  former,  and  to  consign  the  latter  to  unending  wretchedness. 
Thus  his    designs  must  have  been  constantly  broken. 

Besides,  upon  the  Arminian  hypothesis,  that  God's  plan  is  not  e- 
ternal,  and  that  all  his  determinations  are  conditional,  he  becomes  a 
changeable  Being.  He  determines  to  create  men  and  angels.  In 
this  determination  the  state  of  his  mind  becomes  different  from  what 
it  was  before  he  had  formed  such  a  design.  Because  he  saw  man  lost, 
he  decrees  to  send  a  Saviour.  Here  again  he  passes  into  another  state 
of  mmd.  He  foresees,  that  some  will  not  believe  and  forms  the  de- 
sign of  surrendering  them  to  interminable  misery.  Here  he  under- 
goes a  third  transmutation.  Now  if  this  be  so,  how  can  God  say  I 
change  not? 

Again,  Arminianism  makes  the  creature  so  far  as  the  moral  uni- 
verse— the  most  important  part  of  God's  works  is  concerned,  rule 
the  Creator.  If  God's  choosings  in  relation  to  the  creature  be  condi- 
tional, then  the  choice  of  men  and  angels  to  sin  moved  God  to  plan 
destruction  for  the  rebellious  angels  and  a  Saviour  for  rebellious  man. 
By  the  choice  of  some  men  to  believe  the  Gospel  he  is  influenced  to 
decree  their  salvation;  but  by  the  free  will  of  others  to  refuse  the  mes- 
sai^'fs  of  mercy  he  is  induced  to  ordain  them  to  destruction  and  thus 
he  is  operated  upon  in  all  the  infinite  variety  of  his  creature's  choo- 
sings. So  that  by  consequences  drawn  from  this  doctrine  apparently 
legitimate,  the  unchangeable  Jehovah  is  made  to  float  in  theory  like 
a  feather  in  the  air  liable  to  be  carried  North  or  South,  East  or  West 
or  whithersoever  the  capricious  breath  of  creature  volition  may  move. 

APPENDIX. 

To  Jo<;eph  Lybrand,  Samuel  Merwin,  Saniiul  Douj^hty,  John  Lednum,  E- 
lisha  Andrews,  Manninp^  Force,  Thomus  F.  Sargent,  Tlionias  Miller, 
W.W.Wallace,  and  Thomas  Dunn,  Committee  of  pul)hcation;  and 
John  Clarke,  editor  of  the  late  Religious  Messenger. 

As  the  Religious  Messenger  professed  to  be  edited,  and  published  for  the 
Philadelphia  Conference  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church;  and  as  you 
have  given  your  names  to  the  world  as  its  Conductors  and  Editors;  it  is 
presumable  and  presumed,  that  you  owed  your  elevation  to  the  appointment 
^f  that  body;  and,  that  you  appeared  before  the  public,  as  its  regularly  con- 
"tituted  organs. 

This  elevaiion  entitles  you  to  a  notice,  which  from  motives  of  a  proper 
uclf  respect,  of  the  offivial  dignity  of  a  n\inister  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the 
peace  of  the  church  by  avoi<ling  to  condescend  to  a  certain  class  of  men  and 
matters,  might  otherwist'  b"  reasonably    withheld. 

In  addressing  you.  it  is  believed,  that  no  vindictive  feelings  are  indulged. 
It  is  devou'^ly  wished,  that  you  all  v.'ere  more  enlightened  in  the  doctrines 
•n'  owr  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  than  from  some  of  your  publications 


191 

you  appear  to  be:  and,  that  you  were  so  deeply  imbued  with  that  spirit  of 
chanty,  which  gives  these  doctrines  power  over  the  heart,  as  to  prevent 
you  fronrt  descending  to  the  low  walks  of  bigotry,  to  pander  for  circulation, 
reports  of  things,  that  mnay  be  discoloured  by  prejudice,  perverted  by  depra- 
vity, or  distorted  through  the  obscure  naedium  of  naental  inibecihty. 

But  for  the  individual  interest  of  any  of  us,  the  general  interest  of  truth 
and  religion  ought  not  to  suffer.  Better  that  the  personal  character  of  any  of 
us,  or  of  all  of  us  together,  should  be  sunk  a  thousand  degrees  below  the  centre 
of  the  world,  than  that  one  pin  in  the  temple  of  truth  should  lie  buried  in 
the  rubbish  of  our  ignorance,  prejudice,  or  sectarian  bigotry 

When  the  Remarks  published  in  the  Christian  Preacher  were  written,  it 
vas  supposed  that  a  faculty,  that  could  send  forth  strictures,  such  as 
those  on  which  the  remarks  were  made,  would  become  fractious  on  seeing 
their  falsehoods  unmasked  and  their  ignorance  ridiculed.  In  this  there  was 
no  disappointment — To  sustain  the  mean  personal  attack  made  in  your 
strictures,  upon  the  Editor  in  the  slanderous  misrepresentation  of  his  sermon, 
on  religious  ignorance,  and  in  the  Christian  Preacher,  No.  4,  p  96,  and 
No  5.  pp  118,  119,  challenged  as  a  falsehood,  you  have  introduced  an  ano- 
nymous letter.  In  this  letter  probably  written  6y  some  blackguard,  as  cer- 
tain approbrious  language  which  it  contains  would  rather  indicate,  it  is  repor- 
ted, thai  the  offensive  part  of  the  sermon  was  taken  down  by  one  of  the  au- 
dience, and  is  as  follows:  "You  do  not  know,  whether  St,  Paul  or  Nebu- 
chadnezzar lived  first;  whether  Jesus  Christ  or  Judas  Iscariot  was  crucified 
to  save  sinners;  or  whether  the  Jewish  captivity  was  before  or  after  the 
flood: — In  fine  your  religious  atmosphere  is  as  dark  as  the  smoke  which 
ascends  from  the  bottomless  pit."  This  letter  also  informs  us,  that  this 
language  being  reported  to  a  clerical  individual*,  he  carried  it  into  the  pul- 
pit, and  quoting  it  to  the  people,  informed  them,  "that  were  he  to  apply 
such  language  to  them  he  should  tel!  an  untruth,  or  in  other  words  a  lie  "— . 
This  anonymous  letter  writer  also  says  "we  maintain,  that  we  do  not  mis- 
take, or  do  violence  to  his  warning,  when  we  state,  that  his  (the  Editor's) 
remarks  were  levelled  at  Metbodi&ni.'' 

The  language  of  the  sermon  as  given  by  this  reporter  is  a  falsehood,  for 
which  you  are  held  before  the  public  accountable  as  the  panderers  and  pub- 
lishers until  you  surrender  your  atuhority.  Now  it  is  certain,  that  even  in- 
telligent and  skilful  stenographers,  who  come  prepared  for  reporting  ser- 
mons and  speeches,  frequently  misap]:>rehend  the  speaker,  and  commit  great 
errors,  the  public  should  liave  been  informed,  and  that  too  by  better  autho- 
rity than  that  of  some  vulgar  anonymous  letter  writer,  whether  this  profes- 
sed reporter  is  not  some  ixeak,  prejudiced,  gossiping  bigot,  unacquainted  with 
stenogiaphy  and  destitute  of  every  other  qualification  requisite  in  a  reporter. 

But  even  supposing  the  reporter  to  have  been  competent  and  the  words, 
to  have  been  delivered  as  reported,  and  the  speaker  to  have  known  that,  as 
the  anonymous  letter  states,  one  half  of  the  congregation  were  Methodists, 
by  what  kind  of  logick  could  the  language  be  construed  as  levelled  at  them  ' 
Of  the  remaining  half  of  the  congregation  present  some  were  Presbyterians 
and  some  were  Episcopalians;  why  might  not  they  as  well  say,  that  it  was 
levelled  at  them?  Why  nobody  take  offence  but  Methodists?  And  why  scarcely 
any  of  them?!  Why  did  not  the  Episcopalians,  on  the  first  opportunity,  charge 
their  minister  to  quote  the  offensive  language  to  their  congregation,  and  give  it 
the /te  of  the  church?  Upon  the  principle  here  assumed,  even  in  our  own  houses 
cf  worship,  we  must  not  J>.?Ly  "Feligious  ignorance,^'  or  Methodist  preachers  wWl 
thunder  the//>  at  our  heads  from  the  pulpit,  and  the  Philadelphia  Conference 
will  rise  upon  us  in  masse,  znd  rend  us  in  more  pieces  than  Sampson  did  the 


*It  is  but  justice,  that  the  public  should  know,  that  the  performer  of  this 
gallant  exploit  is  said  to  be,  The  Rev.  Solomon  Higgins. 

fin  justice  to  the  Methodists  of  Smyrna  it  is  believed  that  gll  this  mischief 
making^ business  was  confined  to  a  very  small  number  of  their  society. 


192 

lion.  If  we  may  be  allowed  to  compare  mean  thinj^s  together,  this  resem- 
bles the  story  of  Portugese  Joe.  He  was  fond  of  intruding  himself  into  the 
company  of  gentlemen.  In  such  attempts  he  was  sometimes  ridiculed; 
and  being  of  rather  a  swarihy  complexion,  he  was  frequently,  humorously 
called  black  Joe,  and  told,  that  he  was  better  suited  for  the  company  of  mu. 
lattoes  than  that  of  gentlemen.  Joe  did  not  perfectly  understand  English, 
but  he  began  to  Hnd,  that  there  was  someihing  not  verv  dignitied  associated 
tvith  the  term  black,  and  this  he  was  determined  henceforth  to  resent.  Soon 
afrerwards  Joe  happened  to  be  standing  near  two  men  in  conversation,  and 
in  the  course  of  their  colloquy,  one  of  them  chanced  to  repeat  the  word  black. 
Immediately,  almost  burning  with  rage  and  drawing  his  hand  from  his 
pocket,  Joe  squares  himself  before  the  gentleman,  and  exclaims,  with  ven- 
geance in  his  eye,  "you  call  me  inlaci!  me  ronipe  yuii  viy  knife"  And  so  it 
seems  we  must  not  say  to  our  hearers,  ignoraficc,  or  the  Philadelphia  Con 
ference  will  rompc  us  in  the  Religious  Messenger.  Perhaps  wc  ought  to 
make  for  them  very  much  the  same  kind  of  allowance,  that  we  would  for 
poor  Joe 

In  your  Messenger  of  Dec.  13,  you  represent  the  Editor  of  the  Christian 
Preacher,  when  called  to  converse  v.'ith  a  person,  who  was  the  subject  of  a- 
wakening  grace,  and  who  was  under  apprehensions  that  his  day  of  mercy  was 
.past — as  soothing  him  by  telling  him  "that  God  had  begun  a  good  work  in 
him,  and  that,  as  he  had  begun,  so  he  would  complete  it  in  his  own  good 
rinie,  to  the  glory  of  his  grace,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  was  at  work  and  would 
.sustain  him  through  the  merits  of  Christ."  You  also  report  the  distressed 
person  as  taking  comfort  from  the  conversation  and  returning  peaceably  to 
his  sins:  This  representation,  or  rather,  this  misrejjresentation  is  -xjalsehood^ 

Tau  are  arraigned  before  the  bar  of  the  public  as  its  procurers  and  publishers. 
The  publication  of  this  anecdote,  has  in  it,  more  of  certain  o?/)er  qualities  of 
the  dove,  than  its  hannlessuess;  and  more  of  certain  other  qualities  of  the 
serpent,  than  its  cunning. 

The  malignity  of  this  story  is  only  equalled  by  the  ignorance  which  it  pro- 
claims. This  anecdote  you  adduce  as  a  practical  comment  on  spending 
years  in  studious  prejiaration  for  the  work  of  the  ministry.  No  stronger 
proof  however,  can  be  adduced  in  one  thing,  than  this,  for  the  necessity  of 
such  preparation  If  you  have  represented  in  this  fabrication,  as  a  doctrine 
of  the  Presbyterian  church,  that,  which  is  probably  the  ductrine  oi  no  church. 
Who  believes,  that  every  convicted,  and  alarmed  person  will  assuredly  be- 
come a  christian?  If  you  had  spent  a  few  years  in  diligent  study,  you  would 
probably  have  known  better,  than  to  have  inij)utcd  any  such  a  doctrine  to  a 
Presbyterian  minister.  The  man  who  framed  this  story  may  have  had  a 
heart  bad  enough;  but  not  a  head  good  enough  to  contrive  even  a  feasible  lie. 
And  none  but  a  pack  of  blockheads,  could  have  given  it  publication,  because 
any  others  would  have  known,  that  it  would  proclaim  the:r  own  ignorance. 
Even  Satan  himself,  much  as  he  delights  in  falsehood,  no  doubt  blushes  to 
behold  ^iich  devil-like  wickedness,  beleaguered  by  the  dove-like  weakness  that 
enters  into  the  composition  of  this  lie;  and  if  its  inventor  and  publishers  do  not 
blush.  It  is  because  they  have  all  the  Devil's  impudence  without  any  of  his 
good  sense. 

The  pages  of  the  Christian  Preacher  are  intended  to  be  devoted  to  the 
doctrinal  and  practical  exhibitions  of  divine  troth;  and  it  is  very  much  re- 
gretted by  the  Editor,  that  the  Publishing  Committee  and  Editor  of  the  Phi- 
Jadelphia  Conference,  should  have  mixed  with  their  animadversions  on  doc- 
trinal subjectr.,  mean  faUehoods  (fa  personal  character,  and  thus  have  render- 
ed it  necessary,  that  some  of  our  pages  should  be  devoted  to  mere  personal 
vindication. 

Henceforth  refute  our  doctrines  if  you  di-^like  them  and  the  refutations  shall 
be  treated  as  the  Editor  thinks  they  deserve,  re.,pect/uUy,  if  they  be  intelligent 
and  temperutc;  'uith  .':excrit.  and  ridicule,  if  they  be  of  a  dilTerent  character; 
but  confine  yoursclve';  to  his  luorks.  The  course  you  have  pursued  will  no 
longer  be  endured,  withnnt  recording  your  names  in  a  document  different 
frT>m  the  Christian  Preacher.  l^To  be  continved.) 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHERc 


Vol.  1.  FEBRUARY,  1828.  N°.  9, 


THE  BEST  POSSIBLE  SYSTEM. 

My  counsel  shall  stand,  and  I  will  do  all  my  pleasure.  Isaiah 
xWu  10. 

For  thou  art  not  a  God»  that  hath  pleasure  in  wickedness;  neither 
can  evil  dwell  with  thee.  Ps.  v.  4. 

Having  established  the  existence^  the  immutability^ 
and  the  eternity  of  God's  universal  plan^  the  design  of 
this  discourse,  is, 

4.  To  prove,  that  it  is  one  of  the  best  possible,  to  pro- 
mote righteousness  and  to  prevent  sin. 

There  are  three  distinct  classes  of  opponents  to  the 
theory  advocated  in  this  discourse: 

First,  Those  who  deny  the  doctrine  of  God's  eternal 
decrees,  and  who  of  course,  say,  that  he  has  no  eternal 
plan,  reaching  every  being  and  event  in  his  moral  em- 
pire. 

Secondly,  Those  who  hold,  that  God  has  an  eternal 
plan,  and,  that  he  might  have  created  and  governed  a 
moral  universe  so,  as  to  preserve  it  forever,  totally  ex- 
empt from  transgression  and  suffering;  but  that  all  things 
wisely  considered,  it  would  not  be  so  good  as  one  like  the 
present,  in  which  iniquity  and  misery  abound  and,  that 
therefore,  since  the  moral  creation  would  be  made  better^ 
and  best  J  by  sin,  he  wisely  made  provision  for  its  intro- 
duction. According  to  thesje.  Deity  chose  sin,  because, 
all  things  considered,  it  was  wisely  pronounced  good. 

Thii^dhjj  Those  who  also  finally  advocate  the  immuta- 
bility, the  eternity,  and  the  universality  of  the  divine 
purpose;  and  believe  that  God  might  have  chosen  a  mo- 
ral system,  in  which  sin  would  never  have  spread  its  pol- 
lutions and  its  miseries;  but,  that  he  chose  this  system  of 
disobedience  and  death,  not  because  it  was  viewed  either 
as  better,  or  best  or  even  so  good,  but  simply  because  it 
was  his  pleasure  so  to  choose.  According  to  these,  he 
ivould  because  he  ivould. 


194 

In  the  preceding  discourse,  it  was  distinctly  shown* 
that  the  Arniiniau  v\  ho  denies  the  eternity  of  the  divine 
plan,  or  who,  at  most,  makes  it  an  eternal  plan  of  con- 
ditions, by  adopting  a  theory  which  necessarily  suppo- 
ses, that  God  cJwosts  the  very  conditioiu  upon  which  all 
the  sin  and  death  in  the  imiverse  depended  and  turned^ 
as  really  implicates  the  Holy  One  with  the  authorship 
of  sin,  as  the  Calvinist,  who  supposes,  that  God  chose  the 
same  universe  without  any  conditions.  And  if  so,  it 
appears,  that  however  much  these  three  classes  of  op- 
ponents, in  other  matters,  differ  among  themselves,  they 
all  agree,  either  by  acknowledgment,  or  by  inevitable 
inference,  that  God  act\ially  chose  a  moral  universe,  sha- 
ded by  sin  and  ravaged  by  death,  when  either  condition- 
ally, or  unconditionally,  he  might  have  selected  another, 
in  which  disobedience,  woe,  and  dissolution,  would  be 
utterly  unknown. 

From  these  preliminary  observations,  w^e  pass  to  the 
consideration  of  our  arguments. 

'llie  constitution  of  moral  beings,  so  far  as  we  are  ca- 
|)able  of  judging,  appear  to  be  adapted  in  the  best  possi- 
ble manner,  to  be  influenced  to  holiness  by  moral  mo- 
tives. 

As  it  was  essential  to  man's  moral  existence,  that  he 
should  be  the  subject  of  law,  and  be  influenced  to  obedi- 
ence through  the  instrumentality  of  motives,  he  was  cre- 
ated with  an  intellect,  and  a  moral  sense,  to  understand 
und  feel  existence  and  the  obligation  of  law,  as  well  as  the 
presentation  and  the  power  of  motives. 

Without  an  understanding  to  discriminate  the  distinc- 
tion, between  nght  and  wrong,  man  coidd  no  more  be 
the  subject  of  moral  law,  than  could  a  clod  or  a  stone. 
To  require  him  to  perform  that,  of  which  he  had,  and  of 
which  he  possibly  could  have,  no  knowledge,  would  be 
visibly  unreasonable.  It  was  sufficient  however,  thate- 
very  gi-ade  of  moral  beings,  had  understanding  compe- 
tent to  apprehend  laws  given  to  their  respective  natures. 
It  would  ha\  e  been  as  unreasonable  to  enjoin  on  man. 
laws  suited  to  the  capacity  of  angels,  as  to  n)ake  a  w^orm 
subject  to  laws,  suiied  to  tlie  capacity  of  man.     And  it 


195 

was  as  unnecessary  to  the  moral  condition  of  man,  that, 
to  keep  the  laws  adapted  to  his  nature,  he  should  possess 
the  intellect  of  an  angel,  as  to  the  irresponsible  condition 
of  the  worm,  that,  to  fulfil  the  design  of  being,  he  should 
possess  the  understanding  of  a  man. 

And  thus  no  excuse  for  disobedience,  can  be  made  by 
beings  of  a  lower  order  and  less  intellect,  any  more  than 
by  beings  of  a  higher  order  and  a  greater  intellect;  be- 
cause the  understanding  of  both,  were  adapted  to  their 
respective  circumstances.  Here  are  two  men:  one  of 
them  possesses  strength  sufficient  to  lift  and  carry  four 
hundred  weight;  the  other,  but  power  competent  to  raise 
and  bear  away  two  hundred.  If  it  be  the  duty  of  both  to 
lift  and  carry  these  different  hundreds,  the  obligation  of 
the  weaker,  is  as  great,  and  his  failure  as  reprehensible, 
as  the  obligation  and  failure  of  the  stronger;  because  they 
are  equally  competent  for  their  respective  duties:  So 
man  in  his  original  estate,  was  as  competent  in  intelli- 
gence for  his  law,  as  the  angels  were  for  theirs.  Had 
God  given  Adam  angelic  powers,  there  is  no  reason  to  be- 
lieve, that  he  would  have  been  any  better  qualified  for 
obeying  the  law  of  Paradise.  It  therefore  can  not  be 
imagined,  how  it  would  have  been  possible  to  create  an 
intellect  better  adapted  to  a  sphere  of  obedience,  than 
man's  was  to  his;  and  the  same  is  presumed  to  be  true  of 
the  angels.  It  is  however  certain,  that  finite  intellects 
of  every  grade,  from  the  loftiest,  down  to  the  meanest  or- 
der, are  all  liable  to  be  deceived,  and  therefore,  not  ex- 
empt from  error.  And  no  remedy  for  this  appears  pos- 
sible, except  to  change  them  from  finite  to  infinite  minds; 
and  this  is  impossible;  because  infinite  knowledge  is  the 
exclusive  prerogative  of  Deity.  It  is  then  no  impeach- 
ment of  his  omnipotence  to  say,  that  he  can  not  create  a 
mind  so  perfect,  that  in  itself,  without  any  supernatural 
aid  or  influence,  it  is,  while  unconfirmed  by  moral  means, 
above  all  liability  to  error.  He  can  not,  because  he  can 
not  create  another  God.  He  cannot  but  himself  be  the 
Supreme.  He  cannot^  because  he  c6{?^^^o/ deny  himselfo 
To  suppose,  that  he  can,  is  to  suppose  a  departure  from 


196 

the  harmony  of  his  perfections  and  from  the  rfectitude  of 
his  being. 

If  this  survey  of  finite  moral  intellect,  be  sustained,  it 
is  not  for  us  to  say,  how  the  understanding  either  of  men 
or  angels,  could  be  better  adapted  to  the  obedience  of 
their  respective  spheres. 

But  a  moral  sense  also  enters  into  the  composition  of 
an  accountable  being. 

Man  is  so  constituted,  that  he  not  only  sees^  hut  feels. 
He  not  only  apprehends  an  object  of  pleasure,  but  he  al- 
so feels  a  pleasurable  emotion.  He  not  only  beholds  an 
object  of  terror,  but  he  also  feels  himself  terrified;  and  so, 
when  he  wanders  from  the  rectitude  of  the  divine  law, 
he  not  only  perceives,  that  he  has  erred,  but  feels,  that 
he  is  guilty.  This  feeling,  acknowledged  even  now  to 
operate  upon  the  minds  of  all  the  variety  of  lapsed  man, 
their  thoughts  always,  either  accusing  or  else  excusing 
one  another^  may  be  recognized  in  its  effects  upon  our 
first  parents,  when  they  hid  themselves  from  the  divine 
presence,  among  the  trees  of  the  garden;  and  may  rea- 
sonably be  supposed  to  have  existed  in  tlieir  bosoms  in  all 
its  purity  and  vigor  before  they  had,  by  transgression, 
lost  their  Makers  image.  So  long  as  their  understand- 
ing viewed  their  moral  movements  to  be  within  the  li- 
mits of  the  holy  law,  the  feeling  of  approbation  glad- 
dened their  steps,  and,  when  to  induce  to  aberration,  a- 
ny  siiggestion  was  offered  which  the  understanding  re- 
cognized as  false,  this  moral  sense  met  the  falsehood  with 
a  frown,  and  fdled  the  mind  with  the  forebodings  of  fu- 
ture guilt  and  of  future  wrath  as  the  inevitable  conse- 
quences of  transgression. 

As  there  neither  is,  nor  can  be,  any  doubt  of  the  ex- 
istence and  the  action  of  a  moral  sense  in  the  constitution 
of  man,  the  jirincipol  question  to  be  decided  in  relation 
to  our  general  proj)osition,  is,  whether  in  kind  and  de- 
gree^ it  was  in  our  iirst  T)arents,  the  best  possible,  to 
guide  them  in  the  path  of  holiness,  and  to  warn  them 
from  the  wanderings  of  sin. 

In  kind,  it  involves  the  compound  feeling  of  guilt  and 
fear — guilt  wl^ch  recognizes  the  law  as  holy,  just,  and 


197 


good;  and  a  fear  which  bows  to  a  power  omnipotent  to 
enforce  its  sanctions;  and  thus  it  was  a  sense  embracing 
all  the  considerations  of  both  duty  and  interest,  the  stron- 
gest principles,  that  can  possibly  be  conceived  to  exist 
in  the  bosom  of  a  finite  intelligent  being. 

As  to  the  cleg7^ce,  the  history  of  our  first  parents  war- 
rants us  in  the  assurance,  that  so  long  as  the  dictates  of 
the  understanding  remained  unsubdued  by  deception, 
and  reported  as  truth  the  sanction  of  the  Lawgiver,  in 
the  day  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surety  die,  so  long 
the  moral  sense  approved  obedience,  and  frowned  at  trans- 
gression; and  approved  and  frowned  in  such  a  degree,  as 
to  pursue  the  one,  and  to  avoid  the  other.  As  this  sus- 
ceptibility of  mind,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  was,  in 
its  province  confined  to  the  decisions  of  the  understan- 
ding, and  constituted  solely  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
them  efiiciency;  so  any  degree  of  feeling  more  than  that 
necessary  to  give  these  decisions  effect,  would  have  been 
no  more  subservient  to  the  purpose  of  obedience,  and 
might  from  its  extreme  acuteness,  have  produced  much 
unnecessary  unhappiness. 

Now  if  these  representations  be  correct,  as  they  are 
certainly  believed  to  be,  there  is  no  possible  way  con- 
ceivable, in  which  the  moral  sense  could  have  been  bet- 
ter adapted  to  promote  the  beauties  of  holiness,  and  to  re- 
pel the  invasions  of  sin.  And  as  the  same  has  been  pro- 
ved to  be  true  of  man's  understanding,  and  as  natural  li- 
berty is  allowed  him  on  all  hands,  it  is  not  imaginable, 
without  indeed  leaving  the  regions  of  possibility  and 
wandering  over  the  wilds  of  perfect  absurdity,  how  man 
could  have  been  better  formed  as  the  subject  of  a  moral 
empire;  and  the  same  is  reasonably  presumed  of  all  the 
higher  orders  of  the  intelligent  universe.  But  was  man 
governed,  as  well  as  created  in  the  best  possible  manner 
to  promote  the  happy  dominion  of  righteousness,  and  to 
prevent  the  desolating  intrusions  of  sin? 

When  God  had  created  him,  he  spread  before  him  all 
the  luxuriance  of  Paradise,  and  elevated  him  to  the  domi- 
nation of  the  world.  All  the  inhabitants  of  ocean,  earth, 
and  air,  bowed  at  his  feet,  and  owned  the  Sub-sovereign- 


198 

ty  of  their  divinely  appointed  lord.  All  on  this  earth, 
that  could  delight  the  eye,  charm  the  ear,  or  regale  the 
taste,  were  his  without  restriction,  with  the  exception 
of  the  fruit  of  a  solitary  tree.  Only  by  maintaining  an 
exclusive  right,  to  a  single  tree,  did  God  assert  his  own  Su- 
preme Sovereignty  over  the  world.  If  he  had  placed 
man  over  this  ample  inheritance  without  any  law,  he 
would  have  disowned  his  own  Supremacy  and  thus  have 
denied  himself;  and  since  according  to  the  infinite  rec- 
titude of  his  own  perfect  nature,  he  7nust  have  no  crea- 
ture without  a  law,  what  more  reasonable,  more  easily 
understood,  or  more  easily  obeyed,  than  the  Sovereign 
mandate  which  encircled,  and  guarded,  the  forbidden 
tree? — It  was  most  reasonable;  its  obedience  implied  no 
protracted,  difficult,  or  painful  exertions,  either  of  body 
or  mind;  it  was  simply  to  withhold  the  hand.  It  was 
most  easily  understood:  it  involved  no  complicateness  ei- 
ther of  thought  or  language:  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of 
ij^ood  and  evil  thou  shalt  not  eaty  is  a  proposition  so  sim- 
ple in  thought,  and  so  plain  in  language,  that  it  can  be 
j)s  perfectly  comprehended  by  a  man  as  by  an  angel. 
It  was  finally  most  easily  obeyed;  because  the  beneficence 
of  the  Creator,  in  giving  him  all  the  abundance  of  the 
world  as  his  empire,  elevated  him  above  all  the  tempta- 
tions of  want. 

And  to  induce  him  to  continued  obedience  no  stron- 
ger motives  could  be  annexed  than  the  sanctions  of  life 
and  death,  contained  in  the  threatning  and  the  promise. 

And  as  if  to  make  the  iiiducement  still  stronger,  Adam 
stood  as  the  representative  of  his  posterity. 

If  l\c  obeyed,  they  came  into  the  world  holy,  harm- 
less, and  undcfikd;  but  if  he  sinned,  they  would  enter  life, 
the  subjects  of  depravity,  and  the  candidates  of  death. 
Now  here  were  the  best  possible  law,  and  the  strongest 
possi!)le  motives. 

But  notwithstanding  all  tills,  />//  one  man  sin  entered 
info  the  ivorld.  The  serpent  said  ye  shall  not  surely 
die:  the  falsehood  v/as  accredited;  and  as  the  error  was 
not  perceived  by  the  undei-standing,  ^o'lt  could  not  be  felt 
by  the  moral  sense.     Man's  understanding  was  finite, 


199 

mid,  therefore,  was  not  above  all  the  wiles  of  deception, 
that  a  wise  Devil  and  a  cunning  serpent  might  invent. 
Here  was  the  unavoidable  inlet  for  the  possibility  of  sin 
in  the  best  possible  system. 

Our  first  parents  ought  to  have  believed  God,  and  not 
the  serpent;  but  still  to  a  different  result  there  was  a  na- 
tural liability,  in  their  finite  minds.  To  have  removed 
them  from  this  liability  was  impossible,  so  far  as  we  can 
judge,  except  by  endowing  them  with  the  attribute  of 
omniscience,  so  as  to  render  them  exempt  from  all  error 
in  understanding;  or  by  some  supernatural  agency  coun- 
teracting the  natural  perfections  and  volitions  of  the  soul; 
or  finally,  by  exhibiting  to  their  view,  other  beings, 
their  enduring  punishment  for  similar  trasgression;  and 
thus  convincing  them,  that  the  threatened  penalties 
would  inevitably  follow  transgression,  and,  that  if  they 
sinned,  they  would  assuredly  die.  But  in  rendering 
them  omniscient  God  would  have  given  his  glory  to  ano- 
ther. In  counteracting,  by  a  supernatural  influence, 
the  natural  operations  of  their  minds,  he  would  have  in- 
terfered with  that  personal  agency,  essential  to  intelli- 
gent, voluntary,  and  probationary  beings.  There  could 
not  possibly  be  any  trial,  where  God  by  his  own  agency 
would  sustain  them  above  all  error.  Nor,  was  it  possi- 
ble, without  a  supernatural  infiuence  upon  their  minds, 
by  the  way  of  vision  or  otherwise,  to  cause  them  to  be- 
hold fallen  beings,  suffering  death  as  the  wages  of  sin. 
No  bodily  beings,  whose  sufferings  only  could  be  exhibi- 
ted to  human  eyes,  had  yet  sinned;  and  to  have  revealed 
to  them  the  fall  of  the  angels  and  their  sufferings  already 
commenced,  would  only  have  been,  to  tell  them,  that  he 
had  done  to  others,  for  their  disobedience,  what  he  threa- 
tened to  do  to  them,  if  they  disobeyed.  But  this  fall, 
and  these  sufferings,  of  angels  revealed  to  man  by  the 
voice  of  God,  would  not  so  far  as  we  can  see,  have  been 
any  additional  evidence  of  the  infallible  connexion  be- 
tween the  sin  and  the  penalty;  because  this  history  of  the 
angels  as  much  as  the  threatening  denounced  against  ea- 
ting the  forbidden  fruit,  would  have  entirely  depended, 
for  credence,  on  the  veracity  of  God;  and  since,  in  the 


200 

hour  of  temptation,  man  disbelieved  the  threatening,  no 
reason  can  probably  be  assigned^  why  he  could  not  have 
also  disbelieved  the  declaration.  If  he  doubted  when 
God  said  **in  the  day  thoii  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely 
die,''  and  believed  the  serpent  who  said  *S'c  shall  notsure- 
lydie;''  would  he  notas  certainly,  have  doubted;  if  in  vi- 
sion, Ood  had  said  to  him,  ^'for  disobedience  angelic  spi- 
rits now  endure  total  banishment  from  heaven,  and  in  the 
chains  of  darkness  are  held  as  the  prisoners  of  justice, 
until  the  judgment  of  the  great  day,  there  to  be  adjud- 
ged to  deeper  and  more  woful  penalties,''  and  have  be- 
lieved the  tempter  who  would  have  said,  ^^angelic  spirits 
indeed  have  disobeved,  but  i/r;  not  and  will  not  surely  suf- 
fer."' 

Thus  so  for  as  our  minds  are  capable  of  judging  of  the 
iitnessof  the  divine  dispensations,  it  appears,  that  in  a 
moral  system,  where  probationary  obedience  is  essential 
as  an  antecedent  to  the  more  perfect  state  of  confirmed 
obedience,  no  better  means  for  displaying  the  divine  ho- 
liness, and  for  counteracting  the  ingress,  and  the  ravages 
of  sin,  existed  within  the  whole  range  of  moral  possibili- 
ties, than  those  which  God  actually  employed  with  man, 
whilst  he  remained  a  probationer  under  the  blissful  bow- 
ers of  Paradise. 

Here,  however  this  question  may  meet  us:  ^"If  the 
best  system  of  moral  discipline,  was  pursued  by  the  Cre- 
ator, in  relation  to  man  in  Eden,  why  did  he  provide  a 
tempter?"  Man  was  not  the  only,  nor  yet  the  most  im- 
portant being  in  the  universe.  All  things  therefore  in 
the  moral  system  were  not  made  for  Adam.  The  temp- 
ter was  once  a  glorious  angel  of  light.  He  with  all  his 
fallen  associates  once  stood  unconfirmed  as  probationers 
for  a  confirmed  state  ofholyand  happy  existence.  Like 
man  in  Paradise,  they  enjoyed  natural  liberty  and  were 
the  subjects  of  moral  motives;  but  exalted  as  were  their 
spheres,  and  mighty  as  were  their  intellects,  their  under- 
standing, was  still  finite,  and  like  his,  liable  to  error: 
and  their  moral  condition  being  thus  mutable,  like  man 
in  his  primeval  inheritance,  they  were  liable,  in  case  of 
transgression,   to  be  hurled  from  their  spheres.     And 


201 

though  their  powers  of  intellect  were  vastly  superior  to 
man's  and  they  commanded  vastly  more  strength  to  re= 
sist  temptation;  yet  as  a  man^  on  the  summit  of  a  moun- 
tain, comprehends  in  his  view  a  wider  circumference,  and 
surveys  a  greater  number  objects,  than  can  the  little  em- 
met from  the  top  of  liis  mole  hill,  so  with  their  semi-in- 
finite powers,  seated  on  their  elevated  thrones,  these  an- 
gelic spirits,  might  behold  within  the  almost  measureless 
circle  of  their  vision,  innumerable  objects  of  temptation, 
utterly  unknown  to  the  humble  tenant  of  the  garden. 
They  no  doubt  like  man  were  forew  arned  of  the  direful 
consequences  of  disobedience,  and  then  were  like  him 
left  in  all  the  liberty  of  choice,  either  to  believe  or  dis- 
believe. Had  they  fully  accredited,  that  the  wages  of  sin 
was  death,  it  is  impossible  to  think,  that  they  would 
have  transgressed;  because  no  sentient  being  can  love 
pure  misery.  Finite  in  their  intellects,  they  may  have 
conceived,  that  God  would  not  carry  his  threatening  in- 
to execution,  and,  that  by  rebellion  they  might  usurp  a 
supreme  pre-eminence  in  the  universe.  And  this  is  not 
mere  conjecture  since  wx  are  informed  by  the  apostle, 
that  pride  is  the  condemnation  of  the  Devil .  And  thus 
they  may  have  sinned  and  have  been  cast  forth  under 
the  curse  of  a  just  Sovereign  to  wander  like  Cain  as  the 
vagabonds  of  creation. 

To  have  planted  heaven's  artillery,  and  have  set  le- 
gions of  cherubim  with  flaming  swords  all  around  the 
bowers  of  Eden  to  guard  every  avenue,  at  which  the 
tempter  could  have  entered  this  Sacred  abode  of  ter- 
restrial bliss,  and  thus  to  have  prevented  him  from  the 
seductive  act,  by  which  sin  entered  into  our  W'Orld, 
must  be  admitted  to  have  been  perfectly  within  the  com- 
pass of  omnipotence;  but  for  any  thing  w^e  know  to  the 
contrary,  it  may  not  have  been  consistent  with  the  best 
plan  of  moral  government,  to  confine  the  angels  who 
kept  not  their  first  estate  so  closely  in  the  chains  of  dark- 
ness unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day,  as  to  hinder 
them  from  traversing  to  and  fro  the  earth,  or  as  to  re- 
strain them  from  the  exercise  of  that  natural  liberty  with 

26 


202 

wiiich  they  were  created,  and  by  which  they  fell.  And 
if  this  be  admitted,  then,  since  evil  became  their  pro- 
per element  of  action,  and  since  in  despite  of  all  moral 
motives,  sin  they  would  pursue,  God  may  have  suffered 
the  temptation  of  man  as  a  means  of  restraining  the  ad- 
vei^ary  from  some  greater  injury  to  the  moral  creation, 
as  he  permitted  the  selling  of  Joseph  to  the  Ishmaelites 
in  lieu  of  permitting  the  destruction  of  his  useful  life. 
So  that  the  permission  of  the  tempter  is  not  inconsistent 
with  rational  ideas  of  the  best  possible  moral  system, 
and  therefore  can  not  be  urged,  with  any  cogency,  as  an 
objection.  And  moreover  since  armies  of  angels  enter- 
ed the  lists  of  rebellion  against  their  Maker,  without 
the  influence  of  a  Tempter,  so  man,  surely  not  more 
powerful  or  less  peaceable  than  they,  might  ultimately 
have  sinned,  had  Satan  never  been  permitted  to  tread 
the  walks  of  Paradise,  or  to  whisper  in  his  ear  ye  shall 
not  surebj  die. 

And  as  before  the  fall,  so  since,  the  best  possible 
plan,  for  the  prevention  of  sin,  is  pursued  in  the  dis- 
pensations of  God. 

To  be  understood,  it  is  necessary  to  remark,  that  in 
judging  of  the  fitness  of  the  divine  dispensations  with 
regard  to  man,  since  the  fall,  it  will  be  all  along  sup- 
posed, that  the  principle  elsewhere  contended  for  in 
this  work  is  true.  It  is  briefly  this:  Man  still  is,  as  he 
then  was,  a  free  agent  and  a  subject  to  be  governed  by 
jnotives;  with  this  difference  however;  he  then  posses- 
sed his  Maker's  image,  and  his  natural  liberty  was  then 
addressed  by  the  awful  motives  of  life  and  death  to  pur- 
sue the  obedience  by  which  this  image  would  he  retain- 
ed: But  nmv  as  a  fallen  being  he  is  destitute  of  that 
image,  and  his  natural  liberty  is  now  addressed,  by  in- 
finite and  eternal  motives,  to  seek,  in  the  regeneration 
of  the  Spirit,  the  restoration  of  that  lost  likeness  offered 
to  him  ill  the  mercy  of  the  Gospel,  without  money  and 
without  price. 

Although  this  position  is  argued  in  another  part  of  this 
work,^'  yet  as  it  lies  at  the  foundation  of  some  observa- 

•No.  2,  throughout. 


203 

tions  now  intended  to  be  made  it  may  tend  to  satisfy  the 
mind  of  the  reader  merely  to  state  the  following  consi- 
derations in  its  support: 

1 .  If  this  position  be  not  admitted^  then^  there  is  no 
constituted  connexion  between  any  means  pursued  by  an 
unconverted  man,  and  his  obtaining  the  grace  without 
which  faith  and  repentance  are  absolutely  impossible; 
and  therefore,  it  matters  very  little,  what  course  of  life 
he  pursues,  because,  according  to  the  supposition,  God 
has  revealed  to  him  as  a  sinner,  no  certain  way  by  the 
pursuit  of  which,  he  may  infallibly  obtain  the  grace 
indispensable  to  change  him  from  a  sinner  to  a  saint. 
And  as  there  is  thus  no  certain  connexion  between  any 
improvement,  which  he  can  make  of  God's  providential 
dispensations,  and  obtaining  that  grace  which  is  unto 
salvation,  so  all  these  dispensations  must  be  utterly  use- 
less as  motives  employed  in  preparing  him  for  accep- 
ting that  gift,  which  only  can  make  him  a  new  creature 
in  Christ  Jesus;  and  of  course,  they  cannot  be  consider- 
ed adapted  at  all,  as  means  for  the  restoration  of  men; 
nor  xdewed  as  any  displays  of  wisdom  in  relation  to  this 
subject.  All  this  is  obviously  at  variance  with,  both 
the  letter  and  the  spirit  of  the  Bible,  and  with  the  gene- 
ral aspect  of  the  whole  economy  of  salvation. 

2.  In  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida,  mighty  works  were 
unavailingly  performed,  which  in  Tyre  and  Sidon,  would 
have  been  followed  with  repentance  in  sackcloth  and 
ashes.  These  however  were  not  works  of  regeneration, 
because  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida  were  upbraided  for 
their  unbelief;  and  yet,  the  Saviour  himself,  who  spake 
as  never  man  spake,  declares,  that  had  they  been  done 
in  other  circumstances,  an  evangelical  repentance,  and 
of  course,  a  saving  faith,  would  have  been  the  certain 
consequences.  Here  is  taught,  a  certain  connexion  be- 
tween the  manner  in  which  unregenerated  men  treat  the 
dispensations  of  God  and  their  experiencing  the  spirit  of 
regeneration;  as  also  the  adaptation  of  the  common  means 
of  grace  in  addressing  the  natural  liberty  of  man,  to  pre- 
pare the  mind  for  realizing  the  necessity  of  the  regene- 
rating operations  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


204 

With  these  prelinunary  observations  in  view,  we  pro- 
ceed to  consider  the  providences  of  God  towards  manaf= 
ter  the  fall. 

On  the  day  of  his  ruin  a  Saviour  was  revealed.  T^Ier- 
cy  fell  from  the  lips  of  God  in  the  promise,  the  seed  of 
the  ivonian  shall  bruise  the  serpen  fs  head. 

As  all  certainties  existed  iru  and  coexisted  irlthj  the 
eternal  state  of  the  infinite  mind,  there  could  be  no  un- 
certainty of  the  exact  number  of  the  human  family,  that 
would  be  so  operated  upon  in  their  lost  estate,  by  the 
means  and  the  motives  of  the  Gospel  as  in  the  exercise 
of  their  natural  liberty  to  come  to  Christ,  and  to  ask  for 
the  spirit  of  regeneration;  and  therefore  in  the  divine 
plan,  the  advent  of  the  Son  of  God  was  justly  viewed  as 
the  greatest  possible  moral  means  of  counteracting  the 
deleterious  effects  of  human  apostacy. 

In  the  economy  of  the  Gospel,  offended  justice  was  ap- 
peased by  the  Saviours  propitiation,  and  the  Spirit  en- 
gaged to  recreate  the  soul,  and  transform  it  to  tlie  lost 
image  of  its  Maker. 

Had  the  Saviour  appeared  in  the  flesh,  as  soon  as  hu- 
man apostacy  required  a  Mediator,  the  necessity  of  his 
taking  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant,  and  humbling 
himself  to  the  accuKsed  death  of  the  cross,  would  not 
have  been  so  plainly  seen,  or  so  universally  felt,  as  it  wa«i 
by  waiting,  until  four  tliousand  years  should  pass  through 
their  revolutions,  and  human  nature  unaided  by  the  divine 
light  of  revelation,  should  also  appear,  in  all  the  phases 
of  its  waxings  and  wanings,  in  its  own  wisdom  and  its  own 
folly.  His  appearance  on  earth  was  deferred,  until  the 
experiment  was  fully  made,  that  the  icorld  by  wisdom 
hnciv  not  God;  wliilst  during  all  this  dreary  intei'val  of 
long  and  dark  centuries,  the  blood,  streaming  from  ten 
thousand  victims,  and  the  fire  blazing  upon  ten  thousand 
altars  appeared  as  lights  and  landmarks,  to  guide  the  pil- 
grim to  a  Saviour  to  come.  And  whilst  the  day  spring 
from  on  high,  that  glimmered  in  the  first  promise,  was 
spreading  ])roader  and  broader  towards  the  dawn  of  the 
Gospel  morn,  the  judgments  of  heaven  pursued  the  guilty 
footsteps   of  all,  that  closed  their  eyes  against  the  ligh^ 


205 

and  turned  their  faces  from  the  briglitness  of  its  rising. 
When  all  flesh  had  corrupted  its  way^  the  windows  of 
heaven  were  opened^  and  the  fountains  of  the  great 
deep  broken  up^  and  all  the  earth's  living  inhabitants 
with  the  exception  of  the  tenants  of  the  ark  were  en- 
tombed in  a  watry  grave.  When  the  inha])itants  of  So- 
dom and  Gomorrah  became  sinners  exceedingly  before 
God,  the  fires  of  heaven  flashed,  and  consumed  the  de- 
voted cities.  When  the  iniquity  of  the  Amorites  was 
full,  God  commissioned  the  tribes  of  Jacob,  to  extermi- 
nate the  guilty  race.  And  Tyre,  Sidon,  Ninevah,  E- 
gypt,  Babylon,  and  Jerusalem,  were  in  their  turn,  each 
desolated,  by  the  judgments  of  an  offended  Heaven.  And 
why  all  this?  Was  it  because,  his  eyes,  were  delighted 
with  the  floods  and  the  fires  of  desolation,  or  because, 
the  weeping  and  wailing  of  the  distressed,  and  the 
shrieks  of  the  dying,  were  music  to  his  ears? — No.  It 
was  that  they  might  be  an  enmmple  to  those  that  after 
should  live  ungodly.'^  At  last  the  light  of  the  Saviour's 
advent  gilds  the  tops  of  the  distant  mountains,  and  angels 
ushering  in  the  day,  sing,  On  earth  peace  and  goodwill 
to  men.  He  appears  a  babe  in  the  manger,  endures  all 
the  indignities,  toils,  and  pains  of  a  lowly,  earthly  pilgri- 
mage, expires  a  victim  on  the  cross,  and  descends  from 
the  cross  to  the  sepulchre;  and  thus  drinks  the  cup  of  hu- 
miliation, and  misery,  to  the  very  dregs,  until  it  is  fi- 
nished. In  all  this  he  bare  our  sins,  he  carried  our  sor- 
rows *,  he  magynfied  the  law  and  made  it  honourable,  and 
suffered  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us 
to  God.  But  he  also  has  arisen  from  the  dead,  and  the 
opening  heavens,  with  the  greeting  of  angels,  have  recei- 
ved him  until  the  restitution  of  all  things.  In  these  most 
august  and  solemn  transactions,  God  gives  man  not  only 
an  opportunity  of  returning  from  his  rebellion,  and  his 
ruin,  but  also  the  strongest  motives  to  return.  On  the 
one  hand  he  sees  exhibited  as  the  strongest  pledge  of  his 
Maker's  benevolence,  his  love  and  mercy,  sealed  by  the 
blood  of  the  Saviour.     On  the  other,  he  may  survey  the 


•2  Pet.  ii.  6 


206 

stern  justice^  and  the  inflexible  truth  of  his  Sovereign, 
wno  spared  not  his  only  begotten  Son^  when  for  man  he 
took  ttie  place  of  a  vicarious  sufferer.  Oh!  what  a  les- 
son of  justice  and  truth  is  taught  on  Calvary!  If  God 
spared  not  his  own  Son^  though^  himself^  holy,  harmless, 
iindeliled  and  separate  from  sinners^  when  only  for  o- 
thers  he  bowed  his  head  to  the  stroke  of  justice,  how 
much  less,  will  he  spare  the  impenitent,  who  in  the  ne- 
glect of  olfered  mercy,  and  in  despite  of  the  Spirit,  tram* 
pies  under  foot  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  and  thus  vo- 
luntarily assumes  the  responsibility  of  his  own  sins! 
Life  and  death  are  now^  set  before  man,  not  in  the  mere 
voice  of  an  abstract  threatening  and  promise,  as  to  Adam 
in  Paradise;  but, drawn  on  the  banner  of  the  cross,  with 
all  the  deep  crimson  of  the  Saviour's  blood,  in  the  infi- 
Tiite  magnitude  of  eternity.  Here  are  motives  for  obedi- 
ence presented,  which  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  could 
not  have  been  exhibited  to  our  first  parents.  They  in- 
deed heard  the  tiireatening  pronounced:  we  not  only  hear 
it  pronounced,  but  also  see  it  fulfilled. 

They  beheld,  in  Paradise,  no  being  suffer  in  human 
nature  for  human  transgressions;  but  we  see  the  earth 
now  deluged  with  water,  and  now  with  blood;  and  above 
all,  tlie  Son  of  God  humbled,  suffering,  and  expiring, 
on  the  cross,  in  the  punishment  of  human  disobedience. 

Perliaps  had  Adam  scejj  the  woful  penalties  of  sin  thus 
exemplified,  and  the  justice,  truth,  and  mercy  of  God  thus 
magnified,  he  had  never  eaten  the  forbidden  fruit  of  Pa- 
radise. And  perhaps  these  demonstrations  of  God's  truth 
and  justice,  and  these  melting  exemplifications  of  infinite 
love  and  mercy,  may  be  motives  ever  before  the  eyes  of 
the  redeemed,  in  the  realms  of  bliss,  to  confirm  them  in 
their  restored  obedience  throughout  all  the  revolutions 
of  measureless  years,  and  all  the  ceaseless  progress  of 
their  ever-enlarging  joys  and  their  ever-increasing  glo- 

Thus  in  the  infinitude  of  the  divine  mercy,  apparently, 
the  best  possible  system  of  moral  means,  has,  ever  since 
the  fall,  been  in  progress,  for  the  recovery  of  erring  and 
ruined  man,  and  for  confirming  him  in  a  state  of  immor- 


207 

tal  rectitude  and  immortal  felicity.  And  this  stupen- 
dous system  of  moral  operations,  will  move  onward 
through  its  cycles,  from  conquering  to  conquer,  subjec- 
ting new  armies  to  its  power,  adding  new  empires  to  its 
triumphs,  and  accumulating  brighter  and  brighter  glo- 
ries, until  the  rays  of  conviction  shall  be  reflected  from 
its  banners  on  every  human  eye,  and  the  sound  of  the 
Gospel  trumpet  fall  pathetic  on  every  human  ear,  and  all 
the  rebellious  nations,  convinced,  awed,  and  melted, 
will,  in  the  exercise  of  their  natural  liberty,  bend  before 
their  offended  Maker,  and  invoke  his  regenerating  and 
pardoning  mercy.     And  then, 

Jesus  shall  reign  where'er  the  sun, 

Does  his  successive  journies  run: 

His  kingdom  stretch  from  shore  to  shore, 

Till  moons  shall  wax  and  wane  no  more. —  Watts, 

But  we  may  venture  a  step  further,  and  say,  that  the 
cross  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  in  all  probability,  presents 
the  infinite  motives  of  terror,  and  mercy,  which  make 
all  the  heavenly  armies,  burn  with  love  and  fall  w^ith  awe, 
when  they  catch  the  sound  of  their  Makers  mandates. 
As  soon  as  Satan  and  all  the  revolting  hosts  of  angels  sin- 
ned, omnipotent  justice  dislodged  them  from  their  celes- 
tial seats,  and  flung  them  down  from  their  glorious  dig- 
nities. The  angels  that  still  stood  guiltless,  when  they 
saw  these  clusters  of  morning  stars  fall  from  the  firma- 
ment, and  sink  in  endless  night,  from  the  fatal  catastro- 
phy,  must  have  learned,  that  not  in  \ ain  was  it  written 
by  the  hand  of  justice,  on  every  gate  of  the  holy  city, 
and  in  the  statute  book  of  every  world,  the  soul  that  sin- 
neth  it  shall  die.  Here  they  saw  it  verified;  when  they 
beheld  Adam  driven  from  Eden,  they  saw  it  confirmed; 
but  when  they  surveyed  the  Redeemer,  suspended,  for 
the  sins  of  men,  upon  the  cross,  and  heard  him  pro- 
nounce it  finished,  they  viewed  it  sealed,  by  the  blood  of 
the  Son  of  God,  and  ratified  by  the  same  voice,  that  said 
let  there  he  light  and  there  was  light. 


208 

And  if  there  should  be  any  orders  of  heavenly  beings 
above  those  angels^  that  for  their  sins  were  cast  down 
from  their  principalities,  lest  t he i/  should  say,  ^^though 
men  and  the  inferior  angels  are  punished  forever  for  their 
first  disobedience,  yet  should  zvc^  the  inhabitants  of 
thrones,  and  powers,  and  more  august  principalities, 
ti'ansgress  our  legal  boundaries,  perhaps  in  consideration 
of  our  nobler  natures,  and  loftier  elevations,  God  would 
not  with  the  same  hand  of  just  omnipotence,  desolate  our 
habitations,  and  consign  us  to  the  deep  of  death  and  night, 
to  be  reserved  for  the  judgment  of  the  great  day^' — lest 
there  should  be  any  doubts  in  the  ranks  of  moral  beings, 
high  or  low,  ^'whether  or  not,  the  result  of  sin  is  inevi- 
tably death,"  God  sent  him,  who  is  above  all  thrones, 
powers,  and  principalities — above  all  armies  of  cheru- 
bim, and  seraphim — him,  lu/io  being  in  the  fonn  ofGoch 
thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  ivith  God — him,  to 
assume  a  human  body,  and  take  the  place  of  human  trans- 
gressors— and  him,  who  is  his  only  begotten  Son,  when 
he  stands  in  the  siimer's  stead,  he  spares  not.  Thus  mo 
ral  beings  all,  in  a  spectacle  of  the  most  awful,  and  au- 
gust exemplification,  behold  the  threatened  penalty  of 
disobedience  sealed,  and  ratified  on  the  cross;  and  all 
are  taught,  that  sulfering  and  death,  God  hath  insepara- 
bly joined  with  sin.  And  thus  the  sufferings  of  impeni- 
tent men,  and  sinning  angels,  and  above  all,  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  redeemer,  are  most  probably  made  the  moral 
means  of  confirming  all  the  holy  armies  of  the  universe 
in  perpetual  obedience.  Stronger  motives  of  love  and 
terror,  are  now  ])resented,  than  before  the  introdiiction 
of  sin,  were])ossible,  and  thus,  the  most  Wise  and  Bene- 
ficent Sovereign,  overrules  the  imperfeet'ion  of  the  mo- 
ral universe,  to  confirm  the  obedient  part  of  the  moral 
universe  in  allegiance  and  felicity. 

It  is  entirely /;ro/;r//^/^,  nay,  we  may  say,  morally  cer- 
tain, that  with  such  exemplifications  of  God's  truth  and 
j\istice  before  their  eyes,  Satan  and  his  satellites;  had  ne- 
ver rebelled,  and  sinless  man  had  never  sinned. 

From  this  survey  of  the  subject,  it  is  evident,  thatthe 
fact,  that  Ciod  maintains  the  holy  angels  and  the  saints  in 


209 

heaven  in  a  state  of  confirmed  obedience,  is  no  argu- 
ment, that  a  sinless  moral  creation  is  possible.  Before 
there  were  sinners  to  punish,  either  in  their  own  persons 
or  in  the  person  of  their  surety,  the  penalty  of  sin,  could 
only  be  threatened  in  the  ears  of  the  moral  universe,  but 
could  not  be  exhibited  mfact  before  their  eyes.  But 
now,  it  is  not  only  proclaimed,  but  exemplified,  not  only 
heard^  but  seen  ?iXi^  felt. 

From  a  careful  attention  to  the  facts  in  the  economy  of 
God's  moral  kingdom,  my  mind  can  conceive  of  no  sys- 
tem of  government  possible,  better  adapted  to  restrain 
from  transgression  and  induce  to  obedience. 

It  is,  how  ever  admitted,  that  our  inability  to  conceive 
a  better  mode  of  creating  and  governing,  is  of  itself  no 
complete  and  conclusive  proof,  that  the  best  possible 
mode  of  creation  and  government,  has  actually  been  a- 
dopted  and  pursued;  yet  it  serves  to  bear  the  mind  on- 
wards towards  such  a  conclusion,  and  prepares  it  well  for 
other  kinds  of  proof. 

It  is  a  mode  of  reasoning  universally  employed  and 
from  this  fact,  appears  to  rise  out  of  the  principles  of  the 
human  mind,  that  a  man 's  system  of  action,  will  be  like 
himself.     And  upon  this  principle,  we  judge  and  act  eve- 
ry day  of  our  lives.     We  will  have  confidence  in  one 
man,  because  he  is  esteemed  a  person  of  integrity,  and 
we  suppose,  that  if  relied  on,  he  will  not  deceive  us. 
We  will  not  trust  another,  because  he  is  generally  consi- 
dered dishonest,  and  we  conclude,  that  if  depended  on, 
he  will  probably  prove  faithless  to  us.     In  adopting  this 
common  sense  mode  of  judging,  we  take  nothing  for  gran- 
ted in  the  principle,  however  much  we  may  be  deceived 
in  the  facts,  w^ith  which  it  may  be  occasionally  associa- 
ted.    If  we  open  the  newly-grown  husks  on  a  stalk  of 
corn,  w^e  find  the  ear  in  miniature,  and  probably  were 
our  vision  sufficiently  penetrating  to  examine  the  seed, 
we  should  there  find,  in  a  still  smaller  miniature,   the 
whole  stalk  with  all  the  ears.     Because  the  grain  really 
contains  the  same  stalk,  and  ears,  which  time  and  oppor- 
tunity exhibit   to  us  in  such  magnified  forms.     In  the 

27 


210 

same  manner  the  principles  of  action  contain  the  germes 
of  action.  Power  comprehends  the  germe  of  action. 
Power  united  with  wisdom,  the  germe  of  w^ise  actions. 
Power  associated  with  wisdom  and  goodness,  the  germe  of 
wise  and  good  actions.  And  where  these  principles  of 
action  are  found,  time  and  opportunity  only,  are  wanting 
to  the  exhibition,  or  full  developement  of  corresponding 
actions. 

Hence  an  eflicient,  wise  and  good  man,  involves  all  the 
miniature  of  good  and  wise  actions,  and  time  and  oppor- 
tunity only,  are  the  additional  requisites  to  the  actual 
occfirrence  of  those  actions. 

And  this  scale  of  Judging  is  not  only  sanctioned  by 
the  pi  inciples  and  feelings  of  the  human  constitution, 
but  is  also  recognized  by  the  authority  of  revelation  it- 
self. In  allusion  to  this  very  subject,  the  Saviour  de- 
clares, that  a  good  tree  hringeth  forth  good  fruity  hut 
a  corrupt  tree  bringeth  forth  evil  fruit;  and  also^ 
that  a  good  man  out  of  the  good  treamre  of  his  heart, 
bringeth  forth  that  tvhich  is  good;  and  an  evil  man  out 
of  the  evil  treasure  of  his  hearty  bringeth  forth  tJtat 
ivhichis  evil^  for  of  the  abundance  of  the  heart  the  mouth 
speaheth. 

Now  only  suppose  a  good  and  wise  man  who  is  efficient 
according  to  his  goodness  and  wisdom,  to  become  immu- 
tal)le,  and  tlien  we  would  expect,  that  his  system  of  ac- 
tion would  invariably  be  good  and  wise,  to  the  w  hole  ex- 
tent of  his  goodness  and  wisdom;  but  conceive  his  wisdom 
and  goodness  together  with  his  power  to  become  infinite, 
and  we  shoidd  judge  his  whole  system  of  operations  to  be 
unchangeably  an\l  infinitely  good  and  wise — the  best  pos- 
sible. Such  a  being  is  (iod;  unchangeable,  and  infinite- 
ly powerful,  good,  and  wise.  Now  if  we  allow  him  these 
atti  ibutes  and  yet  deny  that  his  system  of  operations  is 
the  best  possible,  vve  desert  the  feelings  and  principles 
of  the  human  constitution,  and  above  all,  the  scale  of 
judging  which  the  Saviour  himself  has  graduated,  and 
gi'  e  nmre  credit  to  the  power,  wisdom,  and  goodness  of 
the  creature,  according  to  the  degree  in  which  they  are 


211 

found  to  exist  in  him,  than  to  the  same  qualities  in  the 
Creator  himself. 

But  God  has  taught  us  to  reason  in  the  same  manner  in 
regard  to  himself.  If  he  reveal  himself  to  be  the  Judge 
of  all  the  earth,  the  mode  of  our  reasoning  is  to  be, 
Shall  not  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right?  If  a  God 
of  might  and  wisdom,  we  are  to  infer  that,  he  changeth 
the  times  and  the  seasons;  he  removeth  kings  and  set- 
teth  up  kings;  he  giveth  ivisdom  unto  the  ivise  and 
knoivledge  to  them  that  know  understanding:  He  re- 
vealeth  the  deep  and  dark  things.  If  he  proclaim, 
Return  thou  backsliding  Israel,  and  I loill  not  cause 
mine  anger  to  fall  upon  thee,  it  is  because  he  is  MER- 
CIFUL. If  that,  the  Lord  your  God  ivill  not  turn 
away  his  face  fro^n  you  if  ye  return  unto  him,  it  is  he- 
cause,  he  is  MERCIFUL.  Thus  when  he  reveals  him- 
self to  be  a  wise,  omnipotent,  just  and  merciful  being, 
he  teaches  us  to  suppose,  that  his  operations  will  never 
be  inconsistent  with  these  perfections. 

This  theory  is  sometimes  opposed,  because  by  some 
men  of  speculation  it  is  imagined  to  take  away  the  li- 
berty of  Deity  and  bind  him  in  the  chains  of  a  fatal  ne- 
cessity. 

But  surely,  a  liberty  to  deny  himself  and  become  a 
false,  inconsistent,  and  subordinate  being,  is  a  kind  of 
liberty  which  it  is  apprehended  a  holy  God  requires  not 
at  our  hands.  It  is  believed,  that  the  Scriptures  no 
where  teaches  us,  that  he  wills  so  and  so,  merely  because 
he  wills  so  and  so;  and  that  what  he  wills  is  right,  just 
because  it  is  a  Sovereign  that  wills.  If  this  system  be 
true,  he  might  by  a  sovereign  act  of  his  will  convert  his 
ov/n  holiness  into  pure  sin,  and  all  the  iniquity  of  the 
Devil  into  perfect  righteousness. 

We  rejoice  that  God  is  a  Sovereign,  but  it  is  because, 
he  is  a  wise,  just,  good,  and  true  Sovereign.  We  re- 
joice, that  his  Sovereign  will  is  done  in  the  armies  of  hea- 
ven and  amongst  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth;  but  it  is  be- 
cause, we  believe,  that  his  Sovereign  will  most  perfect- 
ly accords  with  the  most  perfect  wisdom,  justice,  good- 
ness, and  truth.     We  rejoice,  that  the  Lord  reigneth; 


212 

but  it  is  because  we  most  firmly  believe^  that  this  glori- 
ous Sovereign  wills  all  things  in  the  very  best  possible 
manner. 

But  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  this  objection  is  without 
any  reasonable  foundation.  jVecessiti/  is  a  word  which 
ought  to  be  exploded,  from  the  vocabulary,  employed  in 
discoursing  on  the  voluntary  operationsof  intelligent  be- 
ings. It  is  a  kind  of  Proteus,  which  by  one  man  is  taken 
to  mean  one  thing,  and  by  another  another.  In  disqui- 
sitions on  the  voluntary  operations,  of  mind,  substitute 
^^certainty"  in  its  place,  and  misapprehension  vanishes. 

The  certain  harmony  of  God's  choice,  with  all  his  infi- 
nite perfections,  is  no  proof  of  any  infringement  of  liber- 
ty. To  suppose  the  contrary,  is  to  desert  our  manner 
of  reasoning  in  regard  to  men.  Who  acquainted  with 
language^  supposes,  that  a  prudent  and  benevolent  man 
acts,  not  freely,  because  his  choice  of  action  strictly  har- 
monizes with  the  qualities  of  prudence  and  benevolence? 
To  attribute  to  God  a  latitude  of  choice,  which  may  se- 
lect for  its  object,  things  at  variance  with  any  one  of  his 
perfections,  is  to  suppose,  that  his  will  may  beunharmo- 
nious  with  his  attributes,  and  is  to  make  his  choosings, 
acts  of  mere  caprice,  and  not  of  rational  choice.  If 
in  acts  of  choice,  he  have  no  regard  to  mercy,  he  may 
become  cruel;  if  none  to  his  justice,  unjust;  if  none  to 
his  truth,  false;  if  none  to  his  immutability,  changeful. 
Or  if  his  choosings  may  have  only  a  partial  harmony 
with  these  attributes,  then  his  acts  may  become  partial- 
ly cruel,  unjust,  false,  and  changcfil.  But  it  is  belie- 
ved, that  there  is  no  medium  between  the /°/2 //re  hanno- 
mi  of  the  divine  choice,  and  the  divine  perfections,  and 
no  harmony  at  all.  lint  if  no  harmony  at  all,  then  we 
see,  that  the  divine  Being  may  change  himself  into  a 
monster  of  falsehood,  cruelty,  and  injustice,  the  thought 
of  which  isimpious:but  x'ixSxQv^h^^  perfect  harmony^  he 
has  certainly^  hut  freely  adopted  one  of  the  best  possible 
vsystems. 

Some  imagine,  that  the  best  possible  system  supposes 
God,  under  a  kind  of  necessity  to  exercise  mercy  to  sin- 
ners; and  to  be  thus  opposed  to  the  Scriptures,  w  hich  al- 


213 

ways  represent  mercy^  a  free  act.  It  has  just  been  shown, 
that  the  theory  as  here  advocated  supposes  a  necessary 
choice  to  be  no  choice  at  all^  and^  that  the  certain  har- 
mony of  God's  choice  with  any  of  his  perfections^  and 
consequently  with  his  mercy,  is  no  infringement  of  ration- 
al liberty,  and,  that  any  other  kind  of  liberty  is  mere 
caprice.  The  objection  only  hides  its  weakness  under 
the  ambiguous  term  necessity;  remove  the  term,  and  the 
fallacy  is  visible  to  every  observing  eye. 

This  theory  is  sometimes  supposed  to  annihilate  all  dis- 
tinctions between  right  and  wrong,  between  sin  and 
righteousness. 

It  is  confessed,  that  the  theory  heretofore  denomina- 
ted optimism^  lays  ample  foundation  for  the  objection. 
Its  advocates  suppose,  that  God  might  have  created  and 
governed  the  moral  universe,  so  as  forever  to  exclude 
sin,  but,  that  all  things  considered,  it  was  more  useful 
and  therefore  better,  that  sin  should  be  introduced  into 
the  system,  and  for  this  cause,  in  the  creation  and  go- 
vernment of  the  universe,  he  made  provision  for  its  intro- 
duction and  controul.  And  thus  according  to  this  hypo- 
thesis, any  possible  moral  system  without  sin,  would  not 
be  the  best;  and  the  present  is  made  the  best  by  the  sin 
and  misery  with  which  it  is  attended.  To  exhibit  in  one 
view  the  positions,  expressed  and  implied  in  this  doctrine, 
in  connexion  with  their  legitimate  consequences,  the 
statement  is  briefly  this: — 

Utility  is  the  foundation  of  virtue;  therefore  whatever 
is  useful  is  virtuous;  But  in  the  moral  universe  taken  as 
a  whole,  sin  is  useful;  Therefore  sin  is  virtue!!! 

Again,  As  utility  is  the  foundation  of  virtue,  a  useful 
being  is  virtuous.  But  if  sin  be  useful,  Satan  the  author 
and  promoter  of  sin  must  be  a  useful  being;  Therefore 
Satan  is  virtuous!!! 

It  is  with  regret  admitted,  that  this  doctrine  so  appal- 
ling in  its  positions,  and  so  monstrous  in  its  inevitable 
consequences,  is  advocated  in  the  writings  of  very  great 
and  good  men  in  our  own  country,  as  the  best  possible 
system.     But  the  very  terms  in  which  the  doctrine  of 


'^14 

this  discourse  is  announced,  ought  to  redeem  it  iVom  the 
imputation  contained  in  the  objection. 

Again,  God  professes  toha\'e  no  pleasure  in  the  death 
of  the  wicked,  and  not  to  afllict  willingly,  or  grieve  the 
children  of  men.  Now  since  in  all  things  possible,  to  will 
and  to  do,  with  him  are  the  same,  to  select  a  moral  sys- 
tem with  any  amount  of  sin,  whilst  another  which  would 
be  perfectly  sinless,  might  equally  well  have  been  cho- 
sen, the  existence  of  any  degree  of  transgression,  is  a 
matter,  soltly  of  the  divine  choice.  And  as  sufiering 
and  death  are  so  inseparably  joined  with  disobedience, 
as  to  be  identified  with  it,  they  must  also  obtain  being, 
as  matters,  solely  of  the  divine  choice;  and  therefore,  ei- 
ther he  chooses  to  afllict  unwillingly,  and  chooses  that 
in  which  he  has  no  pleasure,  when  consistently  with  all 
his  perfections,  he  might  have  chosen  that  in  which  he 
would  have  had  entire  pleasure;  or  he  does  afllict  wil- 
lingly and  grieve  the  children  of  men,  and  has  pleasure 
in  the  death  of  the  wicked;  or,  finally,  he  has  chosen  the 
best  possible  system;  and  the  moral  evil  found  in  it,  ari- 
ses not  either,  from  the  divine  choice,  or  the  divine  pow- 
er; but  wholly  from  the  imperfections  of  the  ])est  formed, 
aiid  l)est  governed  plan  of  moral  being.  But  as  the  first 
supposition  contradicts  common  sense,  and  the  second, 
the  word  of  God,  of  consequence,  the  third  and  last  on- 
ly, can  be  the  doctrine  of  Scripture  and  of  reason. 

One  pai't  of  our  text  afiirms,  that  God  docs  all  his  plea- 
sure. Of  course  the  plan  which  he  has  eternally  adop- 
ted, taken  as  a  whole,  is  the  one  of  his  pleasure;  but  if  it 
have  not  in  itthe  least  possible  aggregate  of  sin,  ithasin 
it,  some  sin,  which  the  Creator  and  Sovereign  might 
have  avoided,  and  this  avoidable  sin  v»as  introduced  iY?/(- 
///  by  his  Sovereign  will:  and  therefore,  he  cillier  chose 
that  Which  he  was  not  pleased  to  choose,  or  he  had  plea- 
sure in  wickedness.  But  the  former  is  a  contradiction 
in  terms;  aiid  the  latter  is  confronted  by  the  other  part 
of  our  text,  which  declares,  tliou  art  not  a  God  that 
tiuth  pleasure  in  wic/udness. 

This  text  is  confirmed  by  such  other  Scriptures  as 
these: — ""Let  none  of  you  imagine  evil  in  yqur  hearts  a- 


215 

gainst  his  neighbour,  and  love  no  false  oath;  for  all 
these  are  things  that  I  hate  saith  the  Lord.'^^  ^^These  six 
things  doth  the  Lord  hate;  yea  seven  are  an  abomination 
unto  liiui;  a  proud  look,  a  lying  tongue,  and  hands,  that 
shed  iiiuocent  blood;  an  heart  that  deviseth  wicked  ima- 
ginations; feet  that  be  swift  in  running  to  mischief,  a  false 
w  itness-  that  speaketh  lies,  and  him  that  soweth  discord 
among  brethren."*!  And  others  might  be  added  indefi- 
nitely which  variously  denounce  sin  as  the  abominable 
thing  which  God  hates. 

If  he  might  equally  well  have  chosen  a  moral  system, 
that  wouJd  have  remained  forever  untarnished  by  these 
abominations,  then  he  chose  them  not,  as  on  his  part, 
the  unavoidable  imperfections  of  a  moral  creation,  but 
simply  as  imperfection  its  very  abstract  self.  Accor- 
ding to  tliis  theory  the  moral  universe  might  have  been  en- 
tirely sinless,  had  God  willed  it  to  be  so,  and  he  might  have 
willed  it  to  be  so,  in  consistency  with  all  his  perfections, 
yet  without  acting  in  harmony  with  all  his  attributes,  he 
chose,  that  it  should  not  be  sinless,  and  to  accomplish  this 
choice,  he  so  constructed  and  governed  his  accountable 
creation  as  to  introduce  iniquity,  and  thus,  the  theory 
opposite  to  ours,  impliedly  teaches  us,  that  the  Divine 
Being  chooses  the  very  things  which  he  solemnly  declares 
that  he  hates. 

The  Bible  also  testifies,  that  The  just  Lord  will  not 
do  iniquity, X  ^^d  that,  God  can  not  be  tempted  of  evil, 
neither  tempteth  he  any  7nan.^ 

Since  to  govern  the  moral  empire  in  the  best  possible 
manner  to  resist  sin,  and  not  in  the  best  possible  manner, 
are  equally  in  subjection  to  the  pleasure  ofGod,if  hewill 
not  do  iniquity,  nor  tempt  any  man  to  evil,  it  is  reasona- 
ble to  infer,  that  he  would  not  create  moral  beings  with 
any  liabilities  to  sin,  but  such  as  unavoidably  arise  out  of 
the  constitution  of  finite  intelligent  and  free  agents,  and, 
that  he  would  not  expose  them  to  any  inducements  to 
disobedience,  but  such  as  would  unavoidably  attend  their 
circumstances  and  relations  in  the  scale  of  being. 

*Zechariah  viii.  17,     fProv.vi.  16,  19.     :fZephaniah  iii,  5,  §James  i   3, 


216 

If  he  did  not  create  them  with  the  fewest  liabilities  to 
sin^  and  govern  them  with  the  fewest  inducements  to  sin, 
that  in  their  nature,  circumstances,  and  relations,  were 
possible,  it  must  have  been  according  to  the  supposition, 
because,  he  would  not,  and  not  because  he  could  not. 
These  texts  imply,  that  it  would  be  wrong  in  God  to  do 
iyiiquitij  himself  or  to  tempt  men  to  its  commission. 
But,  designedly,  to  communicate  to  others  any  liabilities 
to  do  evil,  or  to  influence  individuals  to  tempt  others  to 
crime,  is  hi  the  eye  of  common  sense  and  in  tiie  estima- 
tion of  our  moral  judgment  equally  criminal  with  actu- 
ally perpetrating  the  crime,  and  with  personally  temp- 
ting others  to  its  perpetration.  Suppose,  that  judging, 
that  if  a  certain  man  should  become  intoxicated  and 
should  in  this  situation  be  operated  upon  by  the  conver- 
sation of  others,  he  would  commit  murder,  I  should  urge 
upon  him  the  intoxicating  draught,  and  should  employ 
persons  as  my  agents,  to  inflame  his  passions  and  incite 
his  mind,  until  he  commits  the  fatal  deed,  would  it  avail 
me  to  plead,  that  I  neither  committed  the  murder  nor 
tempted  him  to  the  commission? 

And  so,  if  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  character 
of  God,  either  himself  to  do  iniquity  or  to  tempt  men  to 
evil,  for  any  thing  we  can  see,  it  would  be  equally  in- 
congruous with  the  holiness  of  his  being,  either  to  create 
his  moral  subjects  with  any  avoidable  liabilities  to  sin, 
or  to  cast  in  their  way  any  avoidable  inducements  to 
transgression  and  to  conse(iuent  misery.  In  either  case, 
he  ineviably  becomes  the  author  of  sin,  and  the  elector 
of  misery. 

Finally,  all  certainties  eternally  exist  in  the  state  of 
the  Infinite  Mind,  and  eternally  coexist  in  the  divine, 
choice,  and  in  agreement  with  all  the  perfections  of  the 
divine  nature;  of  course  the  certainty  of  this  supposed 
avoidable  amount  of  sin,  must  have  eternally  existed  in 
the  state  of  the  Infinite  Mind,  and  coexisted  in  the  di- 
\'ine  choice  and  in  agreement  with  all  the  divine  perfec- 
tions, and  therefore  avoidable  sin, — sin  purely  as  sin — 
is  eternally  the  object  of  the  divine  choice,  and  eter- 
nally aerrecs  with  the  perfections  of  the  divine  nature- 


217 

But  this  agreement  or  harmony  of  the  divine  perfections^ 
emanating  in  the  divine  choice^  constitutes  Suprene  ho- 
linessj  therefore  sin  enters  into  the  very  essence  of  per- 
fect holiness,  and  as  God  dehghts  in  holiness,  he  must  he 
pleased  with  the  ivicked  every  day. 

The  only,  or  at  most  the  principal  objection  to  the  doc- 
trine of  this  discourse,  is  that  there  is  something  sounding 
like  an  impious  audacity  in  aflirming,  that  the  Omnipo- 
tent can  not  create  a  better  moral  universe. 

To  meet  this  objection,  it  ought  to  be  sufficient,  to 
ask  the  objector,   how  much  less  of  impious   audacity, 
sounds   in  the  proposition  which   contains  his   creed: 
'^God  chose,  that  some  men  and  some  angels  should  not 
remain  holy  and  happy,  but  should  sin,  and  weep,  and 
w^ail,  and  gnash  their  teeth  amidst  devouring  flames  and 
everlasting  burnings,  when  simply,  by  his  willing  differ- 
ently, they  might  all  have  remained  holy  and  happy  for- 
ever?'"— There  is  no  neutral  ground  between  these  pro- 
positions.    Either  God  has  chosen  the  universe  in  ^vhich 
there  is  the  least  possil)le  sin  and  misery,  and  which  is 
therefore,  the  best,  or  in  selecting  one  ivo7\se  than  the 
best,  he  has  actually  preferred,  that  some  of  his  creat?ires 
should  be  sinful  and  misemhle.     And  this  is  not  only 
implied  in  the  creed  of  the  Calvinist,  who  rejects  the 
best  possible  system,  but  also  in  that  of  the  Arminian. 
It  has  already  been  shown,  that  by  unavoidable  inference, 
Arminianism  supposes,  that  God  actually  chose  the  ? Try 
condition  o\\\N\\\e\\d\]  the '!^m  and  suffering  of  the  univeree 
depended  and  turned — on  which  turned  the  first  sin  of 
the  Archfiend  with  all  his  apostate  armies,  and  the  sin  of 
man  in  Paradise:  and  also,  all  the  adulteries,  idolatries, 
rapines,  and  murders,  that  ever  have  defiled,  enslaved, 
desolated,  and  stained  the  world,  and  all  that  ever  will; 
and  on  which  turned,  all  the  agonies,  felt  by  the  unnum- 
bered millions,  both  of  infants  and  adults,  that  have  ever 
writhed  in  death  since  the  destroyer  began  his  desola- 
tions: and  all  that  ever  will  endure  the  pains  of  dissolu- 
tion; as  well  as  all  the  unending  torments,   that  shall  be 
endured  in  the  hiiniing  lake  by  the  hapless  armies  of  lost 

28 


218 

men  and  sinning  angels.  Thus  Arminianism  supposes, 
that  God  chose  tiie  condition  on  which  depended  this  uni- 
verse with  all  its  inteinninable  disobedience,  and  all  this 
everduring  misery.  But  why  did  he  choose  the  condi- 
tions— the  ctrtain  conditions  of  such  an  universe?  Was 
it  because,  in  his  infinite  and  eternal  survey,  he  viewed 
it  as  the  very  best  possible  plan  so  to  choose?  No.  Ar- 
minianism denies,  that  God  has  ever  adopted  any  eter- 
nal plan,  that  reaches  to  every  being  and  event.  Why- 
then  did  he  choose  this  condition  on  which  turned  such  a 
vast  amount  of  sin  and  suffering? — The  only  answer  pos- 
sible, on  this  hypothesis,  is,  that  he  chose  it  just  because 
he  rcilled  to  choose  it — He  ztw^A/.  just  because,  he  would. 
Here  the  Arminian  and  ihe  Calvinian  theories  of  philo- 
sophical divinity,  after  pursuing  different  routs,  meet  at 
the  same  point,  and  equally  implicate  a  holy  and  merci- 
ful God  with  the  authorship  of  sin,  and  the  electorship 
of  misery.  Either  conditionally  or  unconditionally,  ac- 
cording to  these  theories,  God  chose  disobedience  and 
death  as  the  lot  of  a  part  of  his  creatures,  not  because  they 
were  the  certain  results  of  the  best  formed,  and  the  best 
governed  moral  creation;  but  simply,  because  he  prefer- 
red their  existence  to  their  non-existence. 

It  awkwardly  becomes  the  patrons  of  such  creeds  to 
comjjlaiu  of  harsh  sounding  propositions.  What  can 
more  grate*  horror  on  the  ear  of  Bible  piety,  than  the 
anti-scri])tural  dogma,  that  re])rcscnts  a  lioly  and  merci- 
ful fiod  as  the  author  of  sin  and  the  elector  of  misery? 

It  has  however  been  already  sho\vn,  that  when  we  say, 
thnt  God  can  not  create  a  moral  system  every  part  of 
whicli  will  ccrtiiinly  nevei'  sin,  we  only  say,  that  he  can 
not  deny  himself  by  creating  beings  as  absolutely  perfect 
as  himself — he  can  not,  because  he  can  not  but  act  as 
God.  If  he  create,  he  creates  ereaiureSn  and  the  most 
exalted  creature  inicon(irmed,  is  fallible. 

A  few  practical  consequences  will  conclude  this  dis- 
course. 


•See  note  at  the  end  of  ihe  sermon. 


^19 

If  in  the  creation  and  government  of  the  moral  unit 
verse,  it  be  true,  that  God  has  eternally  adopted  the  bes- 
plan  possible,  to  counteract  the  existence  of  sin;  if  sin  was 
produced  neither  by  the  choice  nor  the  power  of  God, 
but  wholly  by  the  abused  free  agency  of  the  creature; 
and  if  God  decreed  sin  only  in  determining  to  suffer  the 
creature  to  act  in  the  exercise  of  his  natural  liberty  as  he 
eternally  knew  that  in  the  best  possible  plan  of  moral 
government  he  certainly  would  act,  then  the  vortex  of 
Arminianand  Calvinian  philosophy,  which  whirls  us  into 
the  deep  presumption  of  inferentially  charging  a  holy 
God  with  the  authorship  of  sin,  is  completely  avoided; 
and  the  Presbyterian  can  understandingly  adopt  the 
Sriptural  language  of  his  Confession  of  Faith  and  say  ^^God 
from  all  eternity  did  by  the  most  wise  and  holy  counsel 
of  his  own  will,  freely  and  unchangeably  ordain  whatso- 
ever comes  to  pass;  yet  so  as  thereby  neither  is  God  the 
author  of  sin;  nor  is  violence  offered  to  the  will  of  the 
creatures,  nor  is  the  liberty  or  contingency  of  second 
causes  taken  away,  but  rather  established.^' 

The  adoption  of  this  doctrine  furnishes  us  with  a  key 
by  which  we  are  enabled  to  unlock  the  ark  of  mystery  that 
to  the  minds  of  many,  shuts  up  the  meaning  of  such  texts- 
as  these:  T/iou  ivilt  say  then  unto  me.  Why  doth  he 
yet  find  fault?  for  who  has  resisted  his  ivill? 

As  God  has  decreed  to  suffer  your  sin  only  as  the  cer- 
tain result  of  your  own  abuse  of  natural  liberty,  from  which 
you  will  not  be  restrained  by  the  best  possible  course  of 
moral  means,  he  decreed  it  only  as  an  imperfection  which 
your  abuse  of  liberty  makes  certain  in  the  best  possible 
moral  system.  And  hence  he  merely  determined  to  suf- 
fer it  in  preference  to  no  moral  system.  He  wills  it  not 
as  a  thing  in  itself  desirable,  but  as  a  real  evil  to  be  endu- 
red however,  rather  than  to  endure  the  non-existence 
of  an  universe  in  which,  although  as  a  creature  imper- 
fect, there  is  almost  infinitely  more  good  than  evil. 
Therefore  to  say,  that  he  decrees,  determines,  wills,  or 
chooses,  to  endure  it  as  the  certain  imperfection  of  the 
best  universe,  is  not  saying,  that  he  decrees,  determines, 
chooses,  or  wills  it  as  sin,     A  benevolent  physician  may 


220 

hate  the  travel  of  a  dark  and  stqj^my  night,  or  the  perfor- 
mance of  a  difhcuit  and  dangerous  surgical  operation; 
and  yet,  in  his  endeavours  to  save  the  life  of  a  pati'-iit, 
he  may  determine  to  endure  either  one,  or  hoth  of  tiiesc 
things  which  he  hates.  Thus,  while  God  determiiiLS  to 
endure  your  iniquities  as  the  certain  imperfections  resul- 
ting from  the  best  universe,  lie  hates  them  as  sins.  You 
however  love  them  as  sins.  Here  you  and  God  are  at 
variance.  And  by  doing  the  thing  which  he  hates^ 
though  he  wills  to  suffer  your  disobedience,  you'  have 
resisted  his  will,  and  are  therefore  amenable  at  his  high 
tribinial.  The  perfections  of  the  Most  High,  afford  us 
ground  for  the  strongest  assurance,  that  his  system  of  o- 
perations,  is  the  very  best.  Then,  O  maa^  who  art 
thou^  tfiat  repliest  against  God?  Shall  the  thing  formed 
(as  if  the  Maker  could  possibly  do  wrong)  say  to  him 
that  formed  it,  Why  hast  thou  made  me  thus?  Hath 
not  the  potter  power  over  the  clay  of  the  same  lump,  to 
make  one  vessel  to  honour  and  another  to  dishonour? 

God  has  a  right  to  pursue  the  best  possible  system  of 
operations,  even  though  he  knows,  that  while  a  great  por- 
tion of  his  works,  will  be  confirmed  in  honour,  a  small 
portion  of  them,  by  the  abuse  of  their  own  liberty,  and 
his  goodness,  will  bring  themselves  to  dishonour.  Espe- 
cially, since  by  punishing  the  small  portion  of  disobedi- 
ent, he  confirms  in  allegiance  the  great  portion  of  the  obedi- 
ent; and  since,  if  these  disobedient  had  not  been  created, 
had  notfallen,  and  suffered,  and  thus  become,  as  ensainples 
of  terror  or  mercy,  the  means  of  preventing  others  from 
disobedience,  some  of  those  others,  now  confirmed,  could 
not,  in  that  case,  have  had  before  them  this  means  of 
prevention,  and  woidd  therefore,  have  fallen,  and  have 
become  sinful  and  miserable,  and  thus,  sin  would  not  still 
have  been  prevented;  and  the  amount  of  happiness  in  the 
universe  would  have  been  less  than  at  present.  If  you 
should  ask,  **Iiow  could  God  mercifully  create  us,  intending 
to  suffer  us  to  sin,  and  to  endure  everlasting  woe  as  a 
means  of  confirming  others  in  ha])piness?'^  this  is  the  an- 
swer: The  mercy  of  God  is  but  a  modification  of  his 
goodness.     His  goodness  is  best  displayed,  in  pursuing 


221 

that  course  of  operations  by  whicli^  he  can  conimimicaie 
the  greatest  amo' ait  of  happiness.  It  hae.  just  been  ]  ro- 
ved, that  if  God  had  not  ci*eated  you,  as  much  hap;  iness 
as  there  is,  could  not  noA'  be  in  the  universe;  and  thus, 
it  was  more  merciful  in  Deity  to  create  you.  although  he 
knew,  that  you  would  rebclliously  choose  for  yourselves 
disobedience  and  wrath;  asid  although,  he  determinedt  o 
suffer  your  wretched  choice;  than  to  have  omitted  your 
creation. 

But  let  us  pursue  this  objection  out  to  its  consequences: 
You  say  that  the  Supreme  Being  could  not  mercifully 
create  you,  knowing  that  you  would  certainly  sin  and 
become  eternally  wretched,  even  though  your  disobedi- 
ence and  misery,  should  be  the  effects  of  your  own. 
choice,  and  be  made  the  means  of  confirming  unnumbe- 
red other  beings  in  endless  obedience  and  happiness. 
Then  suppose  your  objection  to  be  valid,  and  that  you  had 
not  been  created:  Others  now  confirmed  would  then 
have  been  without  those  means  of  confirmation  which 
your  transgression  and  misery  have  afforded  them,  and 
without  these  means  some  of  them  would  have  fallen;  and 
their  sin  and  ruin  would  have  been  held  up  as  motives  to 
prevent  others  from  rebellion  and  w  retchedness .  But  they 
might,  on  equal  ground  with  yourselves,  make  the  same 
objection.  And  if  admitted  to  you,  so  equally  to  them, 
and  if  to  them,  to  others,  and  to  others,  indefinitely,  until 
the  result  would  be,  God  could  not,  mercifully,  create 
any  beings  liable  to  sin  and  suff'ering;  and  as  all  moral  be- 
ings unconfirmed,  are  in  their  very  constitution  thus  lia- 
ble; and  as  in  consistency  with  the  freedom  of  their  in- 
tellectual and  moral  nature,  they  can  be  confirmed,  only 
by  a  survey  of  the  wrath,  and  the  mercy,  displayed  in 
the  punishment  and  pardon  of  sin,  a  moral  universe,  ac- 
cording to  the  objection,  could  not  be  mercifully  crea- 
ted. And  thus  according  to  this  hypothesis  the  capri- 
cious and  rebellious  choice  of  a  few  creatures,  ought  to 
prevent  all  the  happiness  and  glory  ever  enjoyed  and 
displayed  in  all  the  immensity  of  God's  moral  kingdom. 
This  would  be  to  sacrifice  the  happiness  of  the  many  to 
the  caprice  of  the  few^  and  is  undeniably  unreasonable. 


222 

And  lieiice  it  is,  that  God  loUling  to  show  his  lorafh 
and  make  his  power  kaown,  endures  with  much  long 
suffering  the  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  (by  their  sins)  for 
destruction;  that  he  inight  make  known  the  riches  of 
his  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy,  which  he  afore  pre- 
pares unto,  glory.  Over-ruling  all  things  for  good. 
God  endured  the  presumptuous  disobedience  of  Pbaraoh, 
that  in  punishing  him  for  his  sins,  he  might  make  such 
demonstrations  of  his  wrath  and  power,  as  placed  on  re- 
cord, should  be  exhibited  to  the  sons  and  daughters  of 
disobedience  from  age  to  age,  as  motives  of  terror  to  warn 
them  of  a  future  judgment,  and  awe  them  to  repentance; 
and  thus  to  become  the  means  of  preparing  them  to  be 
the  vessels  of  glory  and  honour:  And  as  of  Pharaoh  so 
of  other  wicked  men. 

The  doctrine  of  this  discourse,  speaks  comfort  to  the 
christian  when  almost  overwhelmed  in  the  deep  waters 
of  affliction.  Troubles  come  not  by  chance:  The  Lord 
reignethj  and  if  he  send  trials  to  afflict  his  children,  it  is 
for  their  good;  for,  all  things  work  together  for  good  to 
them  that  love  God,  to  thein  loho  are  the  called  according 
to  his  [jurpose.  If  your  heavenly  Father  corrects  you, 
your  sins  have  demanded  this  correction.  It  is  designed 
and  adai)ted  for  good,  if  you  only  look  to  him  for  grace 
to  improve  it  for  good. 

If  improved,  the  light  afflictions  that  are  hut  for  a 
moment  shall  work  out  for  you^  afar  more  exceeding 
and  eternal  weight  of  glory. 

It  proclaims  terror  to  slothful  professors  of  religion, 
and  hypocrites.  If  God  determine  every  being  and 
event  in  the  universe  in  the  best  possible  maimer  to 
prevent  sin  and  promote  ])iety,  tliink  not  to  find  i\  shelter 
for  your  lukewarmness  and  liypocrisy  under  the  decrees 
of  your  Maker.  He  decrees,  that  you  shall  be  free  to 
choose,  and  to  act  as  you  choose;  and  also  he  decrees  to 
emidoy  with  you  the  best  possible  means  to  induce  you 
to  choose  aright,  and  woe,  woe,  woe,  unto  you  U  ye  will 
not\ 

Here  is  the  greatest  encouragement  for  wounded  spi- 
rits, who  convicted  of  their  sins  and  alarmed  at  their  dan- 


223  .   . 

ger,  would  flee  to  some  refuge  from  the  wrath  to  come. 
He  who  rules  the  universe  in  the  best  possible  manner  to 
counteract  sin^  and  prevent  misery,  seated  on  a  throne 
of  grace  and  wielding  a  sceptre  of  mercy,  proclaims:  to 
this  man  will  I  look  ven  to  him,  that  is  poor  and  of  a 
conh^ite  spirit  and  trembleth  at  my  word.  Christ  has 
already  made  a  propitiation  for  your  sins,  and  now  of- 
fers to  become  to  you,  atonement  and  redemption;  and 
only  come  to  him,  and  he  will  give  you  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  create  in  you  a  new  heart,  and  thus  enable  you  to  re- 
pent and  believe.  Come  then  unto  him,  and  whosoever 
Cometh  unto  him,  he  will  in  no  wise  cast  out. 

Finally,  this  doctrine  seals  eternal  silence  on  the  lips  of 
cavilling  sinners.  If  your  sins  arise  not,  either  from  the 
choice,  or  the  power  of  God,  but  wholly  from  your  own 
abuse  of  your  moral  nature,  and,  if  he  holy  and  merci- 
ful, exhibits  before  you  all  the  motives,  both  of  mercy 
and  wrath,  to  invite  you,  and  warn  you,  and  yet  ye  will 
not^  in  the  day,  the  terrible  day  of  judgment,  your  mouths 
shall  be  stopt,  and  you  shall  all  become  guilty  before  God. 
Therefore,  seek  ye  the  Lord  ivhile  he  may  he  found,  call 
u[)on  him  ivhile  he  is  near.  Let  the  loicked  forsake 
his  way,  and  the  ^mrighteous  man  his  thoughts,  and 
let  him  turn  unto  th^  Lord  and  he  will  have  mercy  up- 
on hvm,  and  to  our  God,  for  he  will  abundantly par^don. 


JVOTE, 

^*It  grates  upon  the  ear  cf  peity  to  be  told,  that  the  ex- 
istence of  evil  is  unavoidable  in  the  best  possible  system, 
and,  that  the  present  system  includes  the  greatest  amount 
of  good  which  the  power  of  God  can  effect.'' 

Christian  Jldvocate,  vol.  v.  JVo.  58.  p.  449. 
Had  the  writer  of  this  article  recognized  any  distinc- 
tion between  the  best  possible  system  as  advocated  in  the 
Christian  Preacher,  and  the  theory  of  Optimism  as  gene- 
rally understood,  he  had  passed  unnoticed  in  this  work. 
This  omission  of  an  act  of  justice  however,  renders  some 
notice  necessarv  as  a  means  of  self  defence. 


224 

Those  who  happen  to  dissent  from  this  part  of  the  wri- 
ter's philosophy,  might  pro])ably  say,  that  if  the  word 
pre/ iidice,  were  substituted  for ///e/y,  the  sentence  would 
contain  as  much  argument,  as  much  truth,  and  as  much 
charity  as  in  its  present  form. 

If  the  disobedience  of  moral  creatures  be  not  imavoi- 
dable  on  the  part  of  the  Creator,  the  reverse  must  be  true 
— there  is  no  medium — it  is  avoidable;  and  it  exists  sole- 
ly as  the  o])iect  of  his  preiVreiice.  Of  course  this  wri- 
ter advocates  the  doctrine,  that  God  prefers,  that  the  u- 
niverse  should  not  be  sinless,  and  that  there  should  be  in 
it,  just  the  amount  of  sin  that  actually  exists — that  the 
fallen  arch-spirit  should  be  a  Devil,  and  not  an  angel  of 
light;  Adam  should  sin,  and  twt  remain  the  holy  and 
happy  tenant  of  Paradise;  Cain  should  be  a  murderer, 
and  not  an  acceptable  worsliipper;  the  antediluvians 
should  corr\\\^t  their  way,  and  fill  the  earth  with  violence, 
and  7iothe  the  children  of  righteousness;  the  inhabitants 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  should  be  sinners  exceedingly, 
and  72ot  holy  men  of  God;  and  finally,  that  hypocrites, 
profligate  men,  and  lukewarm  professors  of  religion, 
shonld  all  be  just  as  they  actually  are,  and  no  hetferW 

If  this  be  all  truth,  it  ought  to  be  faithfully  preached. 
Should  then  the  writer  happen  to  be  the  pastor  of  a  con- 
gregation, let  him  ascend  his  pulpit,  and  solemnly  pro- 
claim to  lukewarm  professors  of  religion,  and  to  hypo- 
crites and  profligates — to  all,  that  they  are  just  wliat 
God  prefers  they  should  he,  and  then  let  him  ask  his  pi- 
ous hearers,  whether  such  a  doctrine  falls  not  melodiously 
on  their  ears? 

Whilst  justice  to  the  sacred  cause  of  sacred  truth,  re 
quires,  that  some  strictures  should  be  passed  on  these 
essays  in  the  Christian  Advocate,  entitled  ^*Philosophy 
subservient  to  religion,"  yet  it  is  believed  to  be  but 
truth  to  say,  that  they  betoken  a  mind  capacioiis,  vigo- 
rous,  cultivated,  and  enlightened,  which  though  like  all 
other  human  intellects,  is  not  ai)solutely  above  all  er- 
ror, is  still  above  niany  errors.  The  general  features  of 
their  ])hiloso])hy  arc  iinobjectiouable  to  the  views  de- 
fended ill  the  Christian  Preacher.      Should  Providence 


225 

grant  time  and  space,  these  essays  will  again  be  noticed. 
Since  the  name  of  the  Christian  Advocate,  has  been 
introduced,  the  opportunity  is  employed  to  recommend 
the  work  to  my  readers  generally,  and  especially  to  the 
people  of  my  charge.  It  is  edited  by  the  Rev.  Ashbel 
Green,  D.  D.  L.  L.  D.  one  of  the  most  aged,  learned, 
judicious,  and  profound  ministers  in  the  Presbyterian 
church,  who  having  through  the  infirmities  of  age  re- 
signed the  Presidency  of  Princeton  College,  is  now  em- 
ploying the  evening  of  his  days  in  the  more  retired  and 
tranquil,  but  scarcely  less  laborious  and  perhaps  no  less 
useful  office  of  editing  the  Christian  Advocate.  The 
work  is  what  might  be  expected  from  such  an  Editor. 
It  is  such  as  w^ould  be  valuable  to  any  christian,  but  al- 
most invaluable  to  a  Presbyterian,  who  would  become 
thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  principles,  usages,  and 
state  of  his  own  church.  Without  professing  to  adopt, 
in  toto,  the  sentiment  of  every  writer  who  may  be  per- 
mitted to  contribute  to  its  pages,  I  should  rejoice  to 
see  it  in  the  hands  of  every  family  in  the  Presbyterian 
church. 


APPENDIX. 

(Continued  from  page  192  ) 

To  Joseph  Lybrand,  Samuel  Merwin,  Samuel  Doughty, 
John  Lednum,  Elisha  Andrews,  Manning  Force,  Tho- 
mas F.  Sargent,  Thomas  Miller,  W.  W.  Wallace, 
and  Thomas  Dunn,  Committee  of  publication,  and 
John  Clarke,  Editor  of  the  late  Religious  Messenger. 
Were  you  not  the  agents  of  the  Conference  of  Phila- 
delphia, and  had  not  your  publications  come  before  the 
world,  under  the  authority  of  that  body,  they  might  pos- 
sibly be  permitted  to  pass  with  as  little  regard,  as  a  cer- 
tain class  of  sermons  not  unfrequent  on  the  Peninsila, 
in  which  certain  denominations  of  Christians,  are  desig- 
nated by  appellations,  such  as  stiff-kneed  Presbyterians, 
prayer-book  Episcopalians,  muddy  headed  Baptists,  and 
sundry  other  epithets  too  unseemly  to  be  repeated.     A 

29 


^26 

class  of  discourses  that  excite  a  smile,  and  are  generally 
dismissed  by  saying,  ^*such  abuse  is  unworthy  of  notice. 
It  is  only  the  nonsense  of  old  or  young  A,  B,C,  orD/'  as 
tiie  case  may  be  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the 
Alphabet.  Even  the  Reverend  and  Solomon  act  of  the 
Reverend  Solomon  Higgins,  in  giving  the  lie  to  the  Ed- 
tor  of  the  Christian  Preacher,  from  the  pulpit,  was  not 
publickly  noticed,  until  it  appeared  in  print  under  the 
authority  of  the  Conference.  And  any  one  who  reads 
the  first  number  of  the  Christian  Preacher,  in  the  review 
of  v\  hich,  you  first  began  to  open  the  flood  gates  of  per- 
sonal defamation,  sees  that  it  contains  a  purely  doctrinal 
discussion,  without  any  odious  pei'sonal  or  sectarian  al- 
lusions, unless  indeed  so  far  as  the  consideration  of  ab- 
stract principles  may  be  construed  to  involve  such  con- 
Sequences. 

Appointed  by  the  Conference  of  Philadelphia  to  give 
utterance  to  their  views  and  feelings,  and  to  expound 
their  principles  of  operation,  and  give  them  efficiency, 
you  may  be  taken  as  a  kind  of  index  of  the  piety  and 
theological  knowledge  of  the  Conference.  If  the  Con- 
ference say  you  have  acted  unworthy  of  their  confi- 
dence, the  explanation  will  be  admitted,  but  if  not,  we 
shall  judge,  that  such  as  is  the  committee,  such  the  Con- 
ference. 

The  following  may  serve  as  a  specimen  of  precisioyi 
in  language,  dignity^  charity^  and  truth.  In  your  Mes- 
senger of  Dec.  13,  1827,  you  say: 

*^The  trickery  of  theological  charlatans"  (and  ignora- 
muses you  might  have  added),  ^'has  ever  been  the  curse 
of  religion." — ^'^There  appears  in  all  their  conduct  to  be 
so  much  zeal  blended  with  interest  in  their  movements, 
that  like  the  royal  Psalmist,  instead  of  being  eaten  up 
wi^^b  the  zeal  of  (jod's  house,  they  seem  i7icUned  to  eat 
up  God\s  house  and  all  they  can  get  in  it^ 

The  royal  Psalmist's  own  language  is,  ^'For  the  zeal 
of  thine  house  hath  eateii  me  up."  But  you  tell  us  that 
this  man  after  God's  own  heart,  was  inclined  to  eat  up 
God's  house  and  all  to  be  found  in  it!!!  A  most  outrage- 
ous calumny  if  you  really  mean  what  you  really  say!!! 


227 

The  public  will  no  doubt  rightly  judge,  that  an  Editor 
and  a  committee  of  ten,  who  can  obtrude  on  their  rea- 
ders, in  the  name  of  the  Philadelphia  Conference,  such 
a  farrago  of  nonsense,  are  at  least,  as  well  qualified  for  ex- 
ercising the  knife  and  fork  over  a  wing  of  bacon,  and  a 
dish  of  Irish  potatoes  as  either  for  writing  strictures  on 
theological  systems  and  Biblical  criticism  or  superinten- 
ding the  press. 

Again  you  say:  ^^Indeed,  if  we  may  judge  from  the 
large  pretensions  and  little  labours  of  these  monopolizers 
of  public  teaching,  we  would  reasonably  infer,  that  the 
considerations  of  eating  alone  is  the  mainspring  which  sets 
in  motion  the  whole  machinary  of  their  operations.'' 
Then  you  add  by  way  of  a  note — ^^Since  writing  the  a- 
bove  article,  and  while  it  was  in  the  hands  of  the  compo- 
sitors, we  have  learned,  that  Mr.  C.  has  deserted  his  call 
at  Dover  for  a  louder  one  at  Church  Hill,  Md.  fully  con- 
iirming  our  remarks  about  eating.'^  How  hungry  must 
this  Editor  and  Committee  have  been  for  calumny!! 
They  appear  to  have  been  as  keen  in  appetite,  and  as  far 
scented  for  a  little  slander  as  so  many  starved  crows  in 
pursuit  of  their  fetid  provender.  The  report  was  heard, 
no  time  must  be  lost  to  learn  whether  or  not  it  was  true. 
While  the  article  was  in  the  hands  of  the  compositors ^ 
the  precious  morsel  must  be  thrown  into  the  mess,  and 
doubtless  gave  it  such  a  seasoning  as  made  the  Editor  and 
the  Committee  smack  their  mouths  over  this  sweet  colla- 
tion. Mr.  C.  never  deserted  a  call  at  Dover,  nor  accep- 
ted one  at  Church  Hill .  The  report  is  absolutely  a  false- 
hood^ for  the  publication  of  which  you  are  held  accoun- 
table before  the  public. 

Weakness  leagued  with  falsehoods  appears  to  attend 
the  labours  of  this  Committee  and  Editor.  Even  if  it 
had  been  true,  that  Mr.  C.  had  relinquished  a  call  at 
Dover  and  accepted  one  at  Church  Hill,  there  are  so 
many  reasons  which  may  frequently,  not  only  ^m^^//?/,  but 
require^  a  minister  to  change  his  location,  that  it  really 
is  difficult  to  decide  whether  we  ought  most  to  detest  the 
meanness^  or  pity  the  iveakness  which  the  publication 
of  this  falsehood  betrays. 


228 

Having  disposed  of  the  persona!  calumnies  which  ne- 
ver ought  to  liave  been  hrojight  into  the  controversy  we 
proceed  to  your  arguments.  ^ 

In  your  Messenger  of  Dec.  6th,  1827.  we  meet  with 
some  strictures  over  the  signature  ^'Jeremiah.''  We 
are  there  informed,  that  Clarke,  Parkhurst,  M'-Knight, 
and  others,  warrant  us  in  translating  the  Greek  prepo- 
sition en  [see  Christian  Preacher  No.  4.  p.  94.]  through 
and  by  as  well  as  in.  Who  ever  doubted  the  posi- 
tion? But  what  is  that  to  the  purpose?  The  Christian 
Preacher  sa\s  [see  No.  4.  p.  94.]  that  it  mo^t  strictly 
and  literally  means  2?i.  Then,  because  it  sometimes 
means  throuv^h  and  hy^  it  does  not  most  strictly  and  lite- 
rally m.ean  in\\\  The  very  profound  of  logic!  Prove  to 
us  by  these  authorities  that  it  does  not  most  strictly  and 
literally  mean  in^  and  then  you  will  have  done  something 
to  the  purpose. 

^^Jeremiah"  also  says,  ^'In  Hcb.  iv.  3.  where  apoka- 
taboles  kosmou,  occurs  it  is  manifest  from  the  context, 
that  it  has  a  very  different  sense  from  that  Mr.  C.  says 
it  has.''  Where  has  Mr.  C.  told  you  that  he  believes 
to  be  the  sense  of  apo  kataboles  kosmou?  No  where 
in  the  Christian  Preacher.  Had  there  been  a  writer 
and  publishing  committee  selected  from  the  madhouse^ 
they  could  not  have  written  and  published  any  thing 
less  to  the  purpose. 

In  the  Messenger  of  August  30th,  1827,  ^^An  Armi- 
i>ian"  says,  ^"Mr.  C.  supports  the  first  proposition  thus: 
The  eternity  of  tlie  divine  foreknowledge  and  divine 
determinations: — They  are  ecjually  eternal  according  to 
the  scri])tures — Known  untD  (lod  are  all  his  works  from 
the  beginning  of  the  world: — Here  we  have  his  eternnl 
foreknowledge.  Again,  as  he  liath  chosen  its  h<\fnre  the 
foundation  of  the  ivorld;'^  Here  we  have  his  eternal 
determination  or  choice: — ^*The  two  scrij)tures  above 
quoted"  ('"An  Arminian''  proceeds  to  say)  ^"'to  prove  the 
coeternity  of  the  divine  foreknowledge  and  the  divine 
determinations  of  God-^  (divine  determinations  of  God\ 
What  tautology!!)  ^^if  literally  taken  prove  no  such 
thing.     Fiom  the  foiindatio?i  of  the  world''  (from  the 


S529 

beginning  of  the  worlds  according  to  oar  English  Tes- 
tament, but  misnomered  by  '*An  Arminian/''  who  is 
evidently  a  quack  in  theology)  '^does  not  literally  mean 
from  all  eternity.  Nor  do  the  terms  '^before  the  foun- 
dation of  the  ivorld^''^  necessarily  mean  from  all  e- 
ternity.'' 

Thus  it  is  evident;  that  Acts  xv.  18.  is  the  text  about 
which  this  Arminian  is  soignorantly  and  asvkardly  bab- 
bling. As  his  assertion  is  an  outrageous  misrepresenta- 
tion of  the  original  of  that  text,  the  Editor  of  the  Chris- 
tian Preacher  hurls  it  back  on  him  without  correcting 
his  mistake,  in  misnomering,  ^^from  the  foundation  of 
the  world/'  for  '*from  the  begimiing  oi  the  world.'' — 
That  this  was  the  fact  may  also  be  seen  from  the  refer- 
ences made  in  the  Christian  Preacher  (No.  4,  p.  93.) 
The  original  of  this  text  is  not  apo  kataboles  Jiosmou,  but 
ap^  aionos.  For  the  meaning  of  the  word  <:/"o»2,  *^  An  Ar- 
minian" was  referred  to  R.  Watson's  book,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  his  chapter  on  the  Omniscience  of  Deity,  where 
it  is  said  that  it  should  be  rendered  '^from  all  eternity <^^^ 
and  to  Aristotle  [De  coelo  Lib.  I.  cap.  9].  If  you  are 
not  satisfied  by  a  reference  to  these  authorities  consult 
Wesley's  notes  on  the  text.  Here  is  the  authority  of  a 
man  after  your  own  heart — the  very  father  of  Metho- 
dism. Should  you  have  leisure,  you  may  just  glance  the 
eye  over  the  Christian  Preacher  No.  8.  p.  181.  where 
the  meaning  of  the  word  aion  is  argued.  And  then/?6r- 
haps^  [v^'^^d^y  perhaps  because  judging  from  the  past,  you 
appear  capable  of  committing  any  outrage  on  truth) — 
perhaps  the  good  sense  of  the  theological  community 
will  not  again  be  shocked  with  the  illiterate  babblingy 
that  this  text  does  not  mean  from  all  eternity ^  or  that  Mr. 
C.  says  apo  kataboles  kosmoii  me^nsfrom  all  eternity. 

If  it  could  be  imagined  that  you  can  feel  shame  at  be- 
ing convicted  of  ignorance  before  the  public,  this  might 
be  supposed  to  be  one  of  the  cases,  in  which  your  faces 
would  redden  with  confusion.  Of  this  hov^xver  there  is 
not  the  least  probability.  It  is  one  of  the  peculiar  privi- 
liges  of  the  ignorant,  not  to  be  ashamed  of  ignorance: — 

^^The  wise  are  happy,  nature  to  explore 
And  i\it fool  is  happy  that  he  knows  no  more." 


230 

Such  specimeTis  of  Biblical  criticism  are  a  disgrace  to 
the  1 0th  century  and  become  only  the  dark  ages.  With 
regard  to  the  text  under  dispute,  it  is  believed  that  ally 
friends  and  foes,  with  the  exception  of  Universalists  and 
Socinians,  are  against  you.  The  world  may  now  judge 
of  your  competency  in  Biblical  criticism. 

You  tell  us  by  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah  (not  the  prophet), 
that  if  Jeliovah's  plans  existed  from  all  eternity  they  are 
essential  perfections  of  his  eternal  essence/'  and  appear 
to  suppose,  that  by  this,  you  have  crowded  us  into  a  dis- 
mal dilemma.     It  is  to  be  sure  a  Solomon  like  argu.ment! 
It  has  in  it  all  the  true  spirit  of  a  Duellist,  who  for  the  op- 
portunity of  shooting  a  pistol  at  the  head  of  another,  will 
give  another  a  pistol  to  shoot  at  him.     In  your  Messen- 
ger of  Aug.  '^'Oth.  1827,  ^'An  Arminian"'  by  your  per- 
mission and  under  your  authority  says:  ^-'Now — we  admit 
the  foreknowledge  of  Ood  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  term 
as  a  doctrine  of  the  Bible/'     Now  your  gun  will  shoot 
yourselves  as  well  as  us.     We  may  retort  your  argument 
;?nd  say  if  Jehovah's  foreknowledge  existed  from  all  e- 
lernity  it  is  an  essential  perfection  of  his  eternal  essence. 
Remember  that  as  foreknowing  is  the  exercise  of  omnis- 
cience, so  decreeing  or  choosing,  or  willing  is  the  exercise 
of  the  power  of  volition.     Then  if  we  must  not  believe, 
that  Jehovah's  decrees,  choosings,  or  volitions  are  eternal 
lest  we  make  them  essential  perfections  of  his  eternal  es- 
sence, why  should  we  believe  that  his  foreknowledge  is 
eternal,  since  in  the  same  manner  we  make  it  an  essential 
perfection  of  his  eternal  essence?    This  is  one  of  the  re- 
sults, when  1/carlinfi;  theologians  catch  new  principles,  just 
as  madmen  would  catch  wild  horses,  and  mount  and  ride 
ofl' without  knowiiify  whither  these  strange  and  untutored 
beasts  will  carry  them.     By  your  own  nrgument,  you 
are  brought  to  clioose  one  of  two  things;  eith-r.  to  Q:ive  up 
the  doctrine  of  God's  eternal  foreknowledge,  or,  admitit 
to  be  an  essential  perfection  of  liis  eternal  essence.     But 
if  vou  believe  the  doctrine  and  admit,  that  it  eternally 
exists  in  the  divine  essence,  then  wdiy  not  acknowledge, 
that  the  divine  volitions  n»ny  eternally  exist  in  the  divine 
essence?  1  can  just  as  readily  conceive  a  perfect  being, 


231 

w\\hovLt  foreknowledge  as  without  meaning  or  intention , 
There  is  to  my  mind  something  avjfutly  profane  m  the 
thought,  that  the  eternal  God  should  ever  have  existed 
without  meaning;  that  an  infinite  God  should  ever  have 
lived  without  i?i/inite  meaning;  that  an  unchangeable 
God  should  ever  change  in  his  meaning;  and  that  a  per- 
fect God  should  ever  have  been  Imperfect  in  meaning.  I 
do  therefore,  most  certainly  believe,  that  meanings^  in- 
tentions, decrees,  are  absolutely  essential  to  God  as  a  per- 
fect being.  It  is  indeed  a  sage  arument,  especially  when 
coming  to  us  under  the  authority  of  the  Conference  of 
Philadelphia,  to  be  told,  that  if  the  decrees  of  Jehovah 
are  eternal,  they  must  be  just  what  we  most  sincerely, 
and  rationally,  and  scripturally  believe  they  are!!!!  To 
convince  you  that  this  is  not  my  ipse  dixit,  and  to  pre- 
vent you,  if  possible,  from  displaying  before  the  world  in 
future,  such  a  shameful  deficiency  of  theological  know- 
ledge, I  will  add  some  authorities. 

Cum  ergo  non  possint  accidentaliter  Deo  competere, 
necesse  est,  ut  in  Deo  dicanturessee.?5e?7im/z7er,  ut  actus 
immonentes  voluntatis  ipsius,  cfun  schesie  et  termina- 
tione  ad  extra,  quique  ideo  non  dilFerunt  realiter  ab  ipsa 
Essentia  Dei,  dim  voluntas  Dei,  cum  qua  identificantur. 
nihil  aliud  sit  quam  ipsa  Essentia  volens  inadsequato  con- 
ceptu  a  nobis  apprehensa. 

Francis  Turrettin,  vol,  1.  p.  342, 

^^Since  therefore  they*^  (the  decrees  of  God)  ^-cannot 
belong  accidentally  to  God,  they  must  be  said  to  be  es- 
sentially in  God  as  the  emanating  acts  of  the  very  will 
with  state  and  termination  to  things  without  himself, 
and  which  therefore,  really  differ  not  from  the  very  es- 
sence of  God,  seeing  the  will  of  Deity  with  v»^hich  they 
are  identified,  is  nothing  else,  but  the  very  essence  wil- 
ling, in  a  manner  not  understood  by  iis.'^ 

Dr.  D wight  in  his  Divinity,  vol.  1,  p.  241,  speaking 
of  the  divine  decrees  says,  that  they  are  "no  other  than 
an  unchangeable  state  of  the  divine  mind.^^  Those 
who  believe  in  the  eternity  of  the  divine  plan  generally 
so  far  as  I  know,  suppose,  tliat  it  exists  in  the  divine  es- 
sence, just  as  meaning  in  the  essence  of  an  intelligent 


232 

being.  To  tell  an  opponent  as  you  have,  that  if  his  doc- 
trine be  true,  he  will  be  compelled  to  admit  another, 
which  he  believes  to  be  equally  true,  may  pass  for  the 
arirumeiitum  ad  if^norantirmi  inverted^  and  is  one  of 
the  blissful  effects  of  having  never,  either  read  books, 
or  studied  systems,  and  of  being  profoundly  ignorant  of 
the  doctrines  of  an  adversary. 

fTo  be  continued,  J 


Errata  in  oivr  last  JVb. 

Pag€  irO,  3d  line  from  the  top  for Jhreknev)  re^idforeincm, 
«•      173,   JOth  line  from  bottom  in  phrase '-ani^ say"  omit  and. 

185,  3d  line  froin  top  '' He  indt-ad  conceals"  &c.  read  It  indeed  &c. 

188,  16th  line  from  bottom,  for  of  tbe  hrwe  matter,  redLd  of  brute  matter. 

189,  3d.  line  from  top,   for  ad'tptel  read  adopted. 

189,  5h  line  from  bottom,  tor  creation  read  c-eatures. 

190,  11th  line  from  bott(<m,  for  Edi'.or^  read  Editor. 

191,  20ih  line  from  bottom  for  "Now  it  is  certaiii"  read  Now  as  it 
IS  certain. 

192,  27th  line  from  bottom,  for  "z/'you  have  represented,"  omitting- 
if,  read  vou  have  represented  8cc. 

193,  17th  line  for  beleaguered  read  burlesqued 

181,  in  marginal  reference,  for  ^'illundo,'*  read  Mundo,  and  for  "Cnr. 
loV  Ccclo. 

Errata  for  the  preaent  Ao, 

Page  193,  9th  line  from  bottom,  for fnally  mzd firmly 

194,  20th  line  from  bottom,  'for  appear  read  appears 

194,   13'h  line  from  bottom,  ''for  feel  existence,"  redid  feel  the  existence. 

195,  4ih  line  from  top,  for  'uf  being, ''^  read  of /j/\y  benig, 
195,  9th  line  from  top,  for  ''understanding,"  read  understandings, 
395,   14th  line  from  top,  for  "hundreds,"  read  burdens. 

195,  12  h  Inie  from  bottom  for  "a)id  therefore,"  re^d  and  are  therefore 
199,   12th   line  for  top  for  "perfectirms,  '  rcdd  perceptions. 
199,   14th  line  irom  top,  for  "there"  read  then 

199,  18; h  line  from  bottom,  for  "wheie"  read  %gben^ 

200,  10th  line  from  top,  for  "there,"  read  then. 

201,  line  5rh  from  top,  for  iniviber  objects  number  o/" objects. 
202     15th  line  from  top,  for  peaceable  read  peccable 

208,  4th  line  from  bottom,  for  satellites;  had  read  satellites  had. 

211,  11th  line  from  bottom   for  teache:  read  teach 

216,  16th  line  from  bottom  for  ineviab.'c  read  inevitable. 


THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER 


Vol.  1.  MARCH,  1828.  N^.  lO, 


BIBLE  ELECTIOJV. 

Peter,  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ  to  the  strangers  scattered  throuo-h- 
out  Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia,  and.  Bithynia,  b  LKCT  accor- 
ding to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the  Father,  through  sanctification 
of  the  Spirit  unto  obedience,  apd  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ.— I.  Pet.  i.  1,2. 

Whether  these  scattered  strangers^  addressed  in  the 
text,  were  Jewish  or  Gentile  converts,  is  a  subject  of  dis- 
pute among  the  learned.     To  the  proper  understanding 
of  this  epistle,  the  decision  of  this  controversy,  is  howe- 
ver, a  matter  of  mere  indifference.     As  the  Jews  were 
scattered  abroad  among  the  nations,  there  were  probably 
converts,  both  Jewish  and  Gentile,  in  the  churches  to 
which  the  apostle  Peter  addressed  this  circular.     But 
however  they  were  scattered,  and  in  whatever  sense  they 
were  strangers,  they  appear  to  have  been  gathered  into 
the  fold  of  salvation,  and  to  have  been  the  frie?ids  of  the 
Saviour.     They  were  elect,  chosen  ones,  and  elected  or 
chosen  of  God.     To  elect  or  choose  is  variously  employ- 
ed in  the  Scriptures.  Christ  is  called  ELECT: — Behold 
my  servant  whom  I  uphold,  mine  elect  in  whoinmysoul 
delighteth.     The  tribes  of  Jacob  were  elected  or  chosen 
in  their  national  character:- —  The  Lord  did  not — choose 
you  because  ye  were  more  in  number,  than  any  people^ 
The  angels,  who  have  never  sinned,  are  called  ELECT: 
/  charge  thee  before — the  elect  angels.     By  many  the 
terms  elect  and  chosen,   are  supposed  to  be  frequently 
applied  in  the  Scriptures  to  all  those,  whether  Jews  or 
Gentiles,  who  are  set  apart  by  the  sanctifying  influence 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  spiritual  obedience,  and  the  spi- 
ritual privileges  of  the  Gospel.     In  this  latter  sense,  the 
election  alluded  to  in  the  text,  will  Ke  explained  and  de- 
fended  in  this  discourse. 
The  election  in  the  text  is. 


234 

1  According  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the  Fa- 
ther; 

2.  Through,  or  more  strictly^  in  the  sanctijication  of 
the  Spirit;  and^ 

3.  Unto  obedience  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

1.  These  strangers  are  elect  according  to  the  fore- 
knowledge of  God  the  Father.  It  has  already  been  ar- 
gued, that  God's  plan  of  operations,  is  eternal  and  rea- 
ches every  being  and  event  in  all  the  space,  and  duration 
of  tlie  created  universe.  As  a  result  of  this  general  doc- 
trine, it  follows,  that  the  design  of  electing  these  stran- 
gers, was  eternal.  In  confirmation  of  this,  we  need  at 
present  only  call  God  to  witness,  that  he  hath  chosen  [e- 
lected]  us  in  him  before  the  foundation  of  the  ivorld. 

It  has  also  been  proved  in  another  part  of  this  work, 
that  God's  foreknowledge  and  determinations  are  coeter- 
nal,  and  coincident.  To  avoid  unnecessary  repetition 
the  doctrine  will  in  this  place  be  sustained  only  by  a  sin- 
gle text: — ^'Whom  he  did  foreknow  he  ALSO''(j^ot after- 
wards) *^did  predestinate''.  If  this  predestination  be  not 
coeternal  with  the  foreknowledge,  then  there  must  have 
been  a  period  of  duration,  when  God  must  have  foreknown 
vSome,  whom  he  had  not  predestinated.  So  that  his  de- 
terminations, and  his  foreknowledge  are  coeval.  Butas 
the  scripture  testifies,  that  Known  unto  God  are  all  his 
works  bifore  the  foundation  of  the  ivorld  (or  according 
to  the  original  ap'aionos,  from  all  eternity),  his  foreknow- 
ledge must  be  absolutely  eternal;  and  if  with  it  his  de- 
terminations be  coeval,  they  also  must  be  absolutely  eter- 
nal. God's  prescience  and  his  plan  are  therefore  coeter- 
nal. And  as  according  to  this  position,  there  is  between 
them  no  precedence  in  the  order  of  duration,  the  one 
can  not  be  the  cause  of  the  otlier:  and  the  relation  be- 
tween can  not  be  that  of  caiis*^  and  eflfect,  or  of  antece- 
dent and  consccpicnt;  but  solely  that  of  coincidence  or 
agreement;  au(l  this  squares  literally  with  the  language 
of  the  text:  Ekct  ACCORDING  to  the  foreknowledge 
of  God.  In  iK^rcement  with  his  foreknowledge  of  the 
manner  in  whieh  these  ])articular  persons  in  the  exer- 


235 

«ise  of  their  natural  powers  of  mind^  would  on  hearing 
the  Gospel  preached^  regard  its  warnings,  and  seek  its 
mercies,  God  determined  their  election.  Coeternally 
with  his  foreknowledge,  he  determined  to  choose  those, 
whom  consistently  with  his  glorious  perfections,  he 
could  choose.  And  as  he  creates  and  governs  the  uni- 
verse in  the  best  manner  to  promote  righteousness  and 
repel  sin,  his  eternal  plan  of  creation  and  government, 
is  such,  as  to  induce  the  greatest  possible  number,  to 
tremble  at  the  terrors,  and  seek  the  salvation  of  the  Gos- 
pel; and  thus  to  become  subjects,  that  could  be  foreknown 
as  suitable  candidates  for  his  electing  mercy.  And 
thus,  these  strangers  were  elect  according  to,  or  in  a- 
greement  with,  his  foreknowledge  of  their  being  so  affec- 
ted by  his  providences,  word,  and  Spirit,  as  to  come  to 
Christ,  and  to  implore  the  spiritual  blessings  of  the  Gos- 
pel. And  although  this  coming  to  Christ,  and  imploring 
all  the  requisites  of  salvation,  arose  merely  from  the  cre^ 
dence  given  to  truth,  by  minds  unenlightened  by  the 
rays  of  spiritual  life,  and  comprehended  in  it,  no  repen- 
tance, but  such  as  arose  from  a  fear  of  future  wrath,  and 
consequently  involved  in  it  nothing,  but  what  when 
compared  with  a  holy  law,  is  essentially  sin,  and  brought 
with  it  nothing  that  was  well  pleasing  in  God's  sight;  yet 
in  the  mercy  of  the  Gospel,  the  Holy  Spirit  met  them, 
and  in  regenerating  them,  creating  them  in  Christ  Jesus, 
he  carried  into  effect  the  election,  designed  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  in  God's  universal  plan,  to  be 
completed  in  due  time.  That  this  election  was  perfor- 
med  by  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  learn  from 
the  text,  for  these  strangers  were  elect. 

2.  Through^  or  more  literally  in,  the  smictification 
of  the  spirit.  The  agency  of  sanctification,  is  not  un- 
frequently  attributed  in  the  Scriptures  to  the  Godhead 
universally;  to  the  Father,  and  also  to  the  Son  as  well  as 
to  the  Spirit.  "By  the  Father  we  are  sanctified,  as  we 
are  chosen  by  him  unto  sanctification,  as  by  his  good 
pleasure  and  free  grace  the  atonement  of  Christ,  and  the 
sanctifying  agency  of  the  Spirit,  exist.  By  the  Son  we 
are  sanctified,  as  his  death  is  the  only  means  by  which 


236 

we  ever  become  holy;  and  by  which  the  Spirit  came 
into  the  world  for  the  benevolent  purpose  of  making  us 
holy.  By  the  Spirit  we  are  sanctified^  as  the  immedi- 
ate Agent  in  applying  to  us  the  blessings  of  Christ's  Re- 
demption; particularly  in  renewing  and  purifying  our 
hearts  and  lives."* 

Sanctification  signifies  setting  apart  from  a  common 
to  a  sacred  purpose.  God  sanctified  the  seventh  day 
by  setting  it  apart  from  a  common  to  a  religious  service. 
Under  the  law,  the  tabernacle,  the  temple,  the  priests, 
the  altars,  and  the  sacrifices,  were  all  sanctified  or  set 
apart  from  secular  to  sacred  purposes.  Now  as  man- 
kind in  their  natural  condition,  are  represented  as  in  a 
state  of  darkness,  and  under  the  power  of  Satan,  and 
of  death,  that  act  of  the  Spirit,  which  translates  th^m 
from  darkness  to  light,  and  from  under  the  power  of 
Satan  to  God,  and  quickens  them  that  were  dead  in  tres- 
passes and  sin,  undeniably  sanctifies  them  by  setting 
them  apart  from  an  unhallowed  to  a  holy  purpose,  from 
a  death  of  sin  to  a  life  of  righteousness.  And  this  can 
be  none  other,  but  the  omnipotent  act  by  which  a  sin- 
ner is  born  again,  and  puts  on  the  new  man  which  after 
God  is  created  in  righteousness. 

These  strangers  were  elected  by  the  sanctification  of 
the  Spirit  only.  No  human  co-operation  is  recognized 
in  the  transforming  act  by  which  they  were  elected. 

Although  according  to  the  system  of  agency  which 
God  is  believed  to  have  established  in  the  moral  crea- 
tion, in  recovering  man  from  his  a])ostacy.  the  creature 
is  addressed  as  a  being  possessing  natural  liberty  and  the 
Spirit  is  ofi'ered  to  him  to  become  his  Sanctifier  just  as 
Christ  is  ofi*ered  ready  to  become  for  him  atonement  and 
redemption,  and  motives  infinite  and  eternal  are  urged 
upon  him  to  induce  him  to  flee  from  the  terrors,  and 
seek  the  mercy  of  the  Gospel;  yet  in  the  recreating  act 
by  which  the  soul  is  set  apart  from  sin  to  holiness,  and 
by  which  it  becomes  prepared  for  the  obedience  of  the 
Gospel,  the  sinner  has  just  as   little  agency   as   in  the 

^Dwtght's  Tbeology  vol,  ii.  p.  518, 


237 

sufferings  by  which  the  Saviour  became  his  atoning 
and  redeeming  sacrifice.  So  far  from  co-operating  in 
this  work,  he  no  more  understands  the  mode  of  its  ope- 
ration, than  he  does  the  varied  movements  of  the  wind 
blowing  as  itlisteth;  and  thus  all  cause  of  boasting  is  ex- 
cluded, and  the  language  of  the  apostle  is  literally  ap- 
plicable to  every  new  man:  For  who  maketh  thee  to  dif- 
fer from  another?  And  what  hast  thou  that  thou  didst 
not  receive?  now  if  thou  didst  receive  it,  why  dost  thou 
glory  as  if  thou  hadst  not  received  it?  It  is  not  in  either 
the  physical,  or  moral  power  of  fallen  men  to  will  upon 
themselves  this  radical  change  of  moral  disposition; 
for,  it  is  not  of  him  that  WILLETH,  nor  of  him  that 
runneth,  but  of  God  that  sheweth  mercy.  The  sons  of 
God  are  horn,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  WILL  of  the 
flesh,  nor  of  the  WILL  of  man,  but  of  God.  The  con- 
victed and  alarmed  sinner  might  call  for  mercy  until  his 
voice  should  weaken  into  silence,  writhe  under  the  ago- 
nies of  a  sin  smitten  conscience,  until  his  whole  frame 
should  be  distorted  with  anguish,  tremble  at  the  flashes 
of  perdition,  until  every  bone  in  his  body  should  be  dislo- 
cated, and  weep,  until  he  should  extort  tears  of  blood,  and 
all  would  not  give  the  natural  man  discernment  to  know 
the  things  of  the  Spirit,  nor  enable  him  to  delight  in  the 
law  of  the  Lord  after  the  inner  man.  It  is  only  the 
same  voice  which  called  light  from  darkness  in  the  for- 
mation of  the  world,  that  can  make  the  light  shine  in  a 
dark  place,  and  the  day  dawn,  and  the  day  star  arise 
in  the  sinner's  heart,  and  thus  enable  him  to  see  the 
beauties  of  that  law  which  when  spiritually  discerned, 
will  ravish  his  soul  with  delight. 

But  great  as  is  this  change,  and  far  as  it  is  beyond, 
and  above,  all  the  physical  and  moral  powers  of  man, 
in  the  merciful  economy  of  the  Gospel,  God  meets  the 
sinner  who  would  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come,  and  who 
importunately  and  perseveringly  seeks  the  mercies  of 
the  Gospel,  and  grants  his  regenerating  Spirit  to  elect 
Tiim  by  his  transforming  influences.  But  these  strangers 
were  elect, 


238 

7j.  Unto  obedience  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

They  were  elect  in  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit 
unto  obedience.  The  first  spiritual  act  of  a  regenerate 
man,  is  the  exercise  of  faith  in  obedience  to  the  Gospel 
command,  Believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

And  faith,  the  exercise  of  the  creature,  and  also,  the 
gift  of  God  imparted  in  the  act  of  regeneration,  is  the 
principle  which  gives  life  and  soul  to  every  thing  that 
can  be  denominated  spiritual  obedience;  for  whatsoever 
is  not  of  faith  is  sin.  And  thus  God  elects  or  chooses  a 
pecfple  to  be  holy  and  without  blame  before  him  in  love. 
He  also  elects  them  in  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit, 

Unto  the  sprindling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  So 
soon  as  the  sinner  believes,  the  Saviours  obedience  to 
the  divine  law,  and  his  endurance  of  its  deadly  penalty, 
are  imputed  to  him  for  righteousness,  and  are  accounted 
in  the  estimation  of  justice  as  satisfactory,  as  if  perfor- 
med and  endured  in  the  transgressor's  own  person:  and 
hence,  Christ  becomes  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteous- 
•ness  to  every  one  that  believeth.  Thus  a  sinner  becomes 
justified  by  faith. 

JustiAcation  makes  not  a  man  morally  pure,  but  legal- 
ly acquitted.  One  man  injures  the  person  of  another; 
the  injured  man  arraigns  the  other  before  a  tribunal  of 
justice.  The  latter  is  found  gnilty  of  the  ofTcnce,  and  is 
under  a  legal  arrest  until  he  makes  the  amends  awarded 
to  the  injured  by  the  court.  A  third  person  lays  down 
on  behalf  of  the  criminal  the  amount  of  penalty  deman- 
ded. The  court  receive  it  as  such,  and  thus  imputing 
it  to  the  criminars  account,  they  pronounce  him  legally 
acquitted  or  justified.  This  sense  agrees  witii  the  evi- 
dent meaning  of  the  word  justify  in  such  texts  as  these: 
Twill  not  justify  tJieivicked.  They  shall  justify  the 
righteous.  In  these  passages  it  is  supposed,  that  a  man 
not  i-ightcous  might  be  justified,  and  also,  one  righteous 
might  not  be  justified,  and  in  agreement  with  this  con- 
clusion, we  read  in  the  Scriptures  of  those  who  justify 
fhe  wicked  for  reward. 


239 

In  the  act  of  regeneration,  the  sinner  is  chosen  to  obe- 
dience and  justification;  he  obeys  as  a  consequence  of 
this  sanctifying  change  in  exercising  faith;  and  as  a  con- 
sequence of  his  believing^  the  Saviour  tenders  to  justice 
his  own  obedience  and  sufferings  as  the  price  of  penalty 
for  the  sinner's  disobedience:  and  finally,  justice  accepts 
the  price  as  satisfactory  and  relinquishing  all  claims, 
pronounces  the  transgressor  acquitted  or  legally  justifi- 
ed. Thus  as  a  consequence  of  his  election,  the  transgres- 
sor becomes  free  from  condemnation  through  the  applica- 
tion of  Christ's  blood.  And  hence  the  appropriate  lan- 
guage of  the  apostle:  Who  shall  lay  any  thing  to  the 
charge  ofGod'^s  elect?  It  is  God  that  justifieth;  who  is 
he  that  condemeth?  It  is  Christ  that  died,  yea  rather 
that  is  risen  again.  And  if  the  man  were  to  die  as  soon 
as  this  justifying  act  is  performed  on  his  soul,  he  would 
immediately  pass  into  glory,  for  those  who  are  redeemed 
by  Christ's  being  made  under  the  law,  receive  the  adop- 
tion of  sons,  and  if  sons  then  heii^s,  heirs  of  God  and  joint 
heirs  ivith  Christ.  And  those  that  are  justified  by  faith, 
not  only  have  peace  with  God,  but  rejoice  in  the  hope  of 
the  glory  of  God;  and  also  those  that  are  elected  are  cho- 
sen unto  salvation. 

Thus,  these  scattered  strangers  were  elected  m  sanctifi- 
cation  unto  obedience,  because  by  the  life  giving  and  sanc- 
tifying act  in  which  they  were  elected,  a  principle  of  spi- 
ritual life  was  infused  into  their  souls,  by  which  they  were 
morally  enabled  to  obey  the  requirement  of  the  Gospel, 
^"Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;"  and  unto  the 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  because  all  the 
justifying  efiicacy  of  the  sufferings  of  the  Son  of  God, 
typified  under  the  law  by  sprinkling  the  blood  of  the 
victim  upon  the  mercy-seat,  was,  by  the  exercise  of  that 
faith  given  in  the  sanctifying  act  of  electing  mercy,  im- 
puted to  them  for  justification  of  life. 

It  may  pei'Iiaps  be  supposed,  that  in  this  discourse,  the 
word  sanctification  is  taken  out  of  its  usual  meaning,  and 
completely  confounded  with  regeneration. 

Although  it  be  true  that  the  term  more  frequently 
xlenotes  tliat  purifying  operation   of  the  Holy   Ghost. 


240 

performed  in  the  new  man  after  he  is  not  only  regenera- 
ted, but  justified;  yet  in  its  more  extended  sense,  it  in* 
eludes  regeneration  as  well  as  that  purifying^  which  fol- 
lows justification.  ^*For  really/*'  says  Witsius,  "^^sancti- 
iication  differs  no  otherwise  from  the  first  regeneration 
and  renovation,  than  the  continuance  of  an  act,  from  the 
beginning  of  it."*  Also  Francis  Turrettin  speaking  of 
the  sanctification,  says,  **Truely,  this  real  change  of  the 
man,  is  made  in  various  grades,  either  through  effectual 
calling,  which  imports  the  donation  of  faith,  and  repen- 
tance through  faith,  and  a  translation  from  a  state  of  siu 
to  a  state  of  grace;  or  through  regeneration,  which 
means  a  renovation  of  corrupt  nature;  or  through  the 
infusion  and  the  practice  of  holiness.  Hence  sanctifi- 
cation widely  taken  extends  to  the  whole  state  of  the  be- 
liever.''! ^^Sanctification,"  as  given  in  the  Confession  of 
Faith  of  the  Presbyterian  church,  ^^is  a  work  of  God's 
grace,  whereby  they  whom  God  hath  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,  chosen  to  be  holy,  are  in  time  through 
the  powerful  operation  of  his  Spirit  applying  the  death 
and  resurrection  of  Christ  unto  them,  renewed  in  their 
whole  man  after  the  image  of  God,  having  the  seeds  of 
repentance  unto  life,  and  all  the  other  graces  put  into 
their  hearts,  and  those  graces  so  stirred  up,  increased, 
and  strengthened,  as  that  they  live  more  and  more  into 
sin,  and  rise  unto  newness  of  life. "J 

This  view  of  sanctification  is  reasonable  as  well  as  Scrip- 
tural. Regeneration  is  distinguished  from  sanctifica- 
tion, only  as  a  part  from  a  whole,  and  may  justly  be  con- 
sidered as  ihe  act  which  begins  the  ivork  of  sanctifica- 
tion, and  is  in  nature  a  puiifying,  as  well  as  a  life-giving 
act.  So  that,  although  our  authors  on  divinity,  gene- 
rally tell  us,  that  sanctification  in  the  order  of  time  fol- 
lows justification,  the  fact  is,  taken  in  its  extensive  sense, 
it/6>//ow\v  justification  and />/*e«'6/^^5  it  too.  The  former 
is  a  work  beginning  in  regeneration,  and  continuing  in 
progress,  until  sin  is  entirely  crucified,  and  the  latter  is 

•Wit.sius  on  Cov   vol.  ii.  p.  106,  f  Francis  Turrettin  vol  ii.  p.  754. 
^Lart^e  Catechism  Question  75. 


241 

an  act  (not  a  work)  in  which  as  a  consequence  of  the 
sinner's  believing^  he  is  pronounced  acquitted  by  the 
imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness  to  him.  And  hence 
it  will  follow^  that  when  the  Scriptures  speak  of  sancti- 
lication  after  justification^  they  mean  simply  the  work 
of  purifying;  when  of  sanctification  in  the  abstract,  both 
purification  and  regeneration;  but  when  of  sanctification 
before  justification^  as  in  the  text,  they  simply  mean  re- 
generation. 

The  sanctification  in  the  text,  is  ^^unto  the  sprinkling 
of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,"  which  can  not  be  natural- 
ly interpreted  to  mean  any  thing,  but  ^^unto  justifica- 
tion'' together  with  all  its  consequences.  And  if  so,  the 
sanctification  here  designated  must  precede  justification, 
and  therefore  can  be  none  other,  but  that  part  of  sancti- 
fication performed  in  regeneration. 

And  this  interpretation  is  confirmed  by  another  con- 
sideration. The  strangers  in  the  text  are  addressed,  as 
though  they  were  already  elected,  and  of  course  the  act 
by  which  they  were  elected,  must  have  been  complete; 
but  this  act  is  in  the  text  said  to  be  the  sanctification  of 
the  Spirit,  and  therefore  this  sanctification  must  have 
been  finished.  This  however,  could  notbe  true  of  sanc= 
tification  as  a  progressive  purifying  operation;  because 
in  this  sense  their  sanctification  was  still  in  progress;  yet 
this  would  be  strictly  true  of  regeneration;  because  if 
these  strangers  were  Christians  in  all  the  spirituality  of 
the  appellation,  their  regeneration  as  well  as  their  elec- 
tion must  then  have  been  finished. 

Again,  to  elect  is  an  act^  not  a  vjork;  but  purifying 
sanctification  is  a  work  not  an  act.  Now  to  speak  of 
God  performing  a  simple  act  of  choice  by  means  of  a 
progressive  work,  is  to  employ  language,  w  hich  conveys 
nothing  like  tolerable  sense,  and  to  associate  ideas  totally 
incongruous,  whilst  on  the  contrary,  if  we  understand  this 
simple  electing  act  to  consist  in  the  simple  sanctifying 
act  of  regeneration,  we  can  perceive  in  the  Apostle's 
composition,  the  strictest  congruity  of  thought  and  the 
most  entire  harmony  of  language. 

31 


242 

Thus  we  see,  that  God  chooses  or  elects  men,  not  af- 
ter^ but  most  literally  f/?,*  the  sanctificationof  the  Spirit. 

There  are  two  Arminian  opinions  with  regard  to  this 
election.     They  shall  be  considered  in  order. 

The  first  is,  ^"that  God  from  all  eternity  determined  to 
bestow  salvation  on  those,  who,  he  foresaw,  would  per- 
severe unto  the  end,'^  which  converted  into  other  lan- 
guage, is  simply  saying,  that  God  from  all  eternity  de- 
termined to  elect  those  who  should  believe,  and  perse- 
vere in  the  faith  to  the  end  of  life. 

This  however  can  not  be  the  election  of  our  text;  be- 
cause these  strangers  of  whom  it  is  affirmed,  are  not  said 
to  be  elect  in  design,  but  in  fact,  in  tht  sanctijication  of 
the  Spirit.  They  are  addressed  as  already  elect,  not  af- 
ter obedience  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ.  hwUinto  this  obedience  and  this  sprinkling.  The 
conditions  of  this  text,  can  not  literally  comply  with  this 
Arminian  idea  of  election.  To  have  employed  language 
corresponding  with  this  doctrine,  the  apostle  ought  to 
have  said,  not*^Elect,"  but  •^•hereafter  to  become  Elect/'' 
not  'Un^*^  thrortf^h,  or  by  means  of  the  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit,"  but  "after  t\nt  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,"  not 
"unto  obedience  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus 
('hrist,"  but  "after  obedience  and  the  springling  of  the 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ."  The  Arminian  will  however  in- 
form us,  that  God  calleth  those  thin2;s  that  be  not  as 
thoufrh  they  ivere.  But  this  quotation  is  nothing  to  the 
purpose.  God  gives  us  no  intimation,  that  he  calls  things 
so  here.  And  as  he  generally  speaks  to  men  after  the 
mannnerandin  the  language  of  men,  it  is  most  reasonable 
to  s!ippose  the  same  to  be  his  mode  of  communication  in 
this  text.  But  it  is  unnecessary  to  press  the  matter  far; 
the  very  attempt  at  evasive  interpretation  testifies,  that 
this  theory  of  Arminian  election,  shrinks  from  a  rigid  com- 
parison with  the  literal  aiid  most  obvious  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptiires,  and  like  the  dogmas  of  Socinus,  seeks 
its  refuge  from  the  light  of  open  scripture  day  under  fi- 
gurative inventions. 

•Greek  EN. 


243 

Another  Arminian  opinion  is^  that  the  election  in  the 
epistles  generally,  denotes  God's  choosing  all,  both  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  who  become  professed  Christians,  to  all  the 
privileges  of  the  Christan  church,  just  as  he  formerly 
chose  the  Jews  to  the  privileges  of  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation. 

But  neither  can  this  opinion  coincide  with  the  condi- 
tions of  the  text.     For,  since  this  Arminian  notion  of  e- 
lection  is  nothing  more  or  less,  than  choosing  men  to 
church  membership,  the  act  in,  or  by  means  of  which, 
they  were  elected,  can  be  nothing  else,  but  that  which 
constitutes  men  members  of  the  visible  church.     Since 
in  the  text  they  are  said  to  be  elect  in,  or  by  means  of 
the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  the  unavoidable  result  of 
this  Arminian  doctrine  is,   that  the   sanctification  here 
introduced,  can  only  mean  to  set  men  apart  to  the  mem- 
bership of  the  church.     And  as  it  has  been  shown  in 
this  discourse,  that  the  sanctification  of  the  text,  is  no- 
thing other,  but  regeneration,  theinevitable  consequence 
is,  that  regeneration  signifies  becoming  a  professed  mem- 
ber of  the  visible  church,  and  as  men  become  professed 
members  members  of  the  visible  church  by  baptism,  as  a 
consequence  from  this  hypothesis,  regeneration  must  be 
baptism.     Hence   if  you  adopt  this  Arminian  and  we 
may  also  add  this  Unitarian^'  explanation  of  election,  you 
must  either  be  inconsistent,  or  else  also  adopt  this  low 
Arminian  and  high  Unitarian  notion  of  sanctification  and 
regeneration.     How  one  departure  from  Scripture  sim- 
plicity as  it  moves  downwards,  draws  on  others  in  its 
train!  The  beginning  of  error  is  like  the  letting  out  of 
water,  which  enlarges  the  breach,  and  widens  in  its  on- 
w^ard  and  downward  course.     To  Unitarians  and   one 
class  of  Arminians,  this  is  not  supposed  to  be  any  argu- 
ment.    They  glory  in  these  consequences,  because  they 
hate  the  religion  which  lives  in  the  heart,  but  to  all  Ar= 
minians,  that  with  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  believe  sanctifica- 
tion so  be,  ^^significant  of  that  change,  which  is  to  take 
place  in  the  heart*by  the  grace  of  God,  producing  that 

*See  the  note  at  the  end  of  the  sermon. 


244 

obedience  cominanded  in  his  woid/^*  it  ought  to  be  con- 
sidered  mighty,  and  irrefragably  conclusive. 

Nor  will  it  avail  to  attempt  an  escape  by  separating 
the  election  from  the  sanctification  named  in  the  text  in 
paraphrasing  it  thus:  **Elect  by  your /onwer/?/ having  be- 
come members  of  the  visible  church,  ^^o?/^  in  a  state  of  sanc- 
tification unto  obedience  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ;"  since  this  would  be  putting  a  harsh  and  a 
forced  construction  on  the  text,  and  especi^ry,  since  if 
we  were  to  grant  this  paraphrase  to  be  admissible,  there 
is  another  text  containing  the  same  objection  which  puts 
such  a  gloss  at  defiance:  ''God  hath  from  the  begin- 
ning chosen  you  to  salvation  through'^  (in  or  by  means  of) 
^'sanctification  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth." 
Herein  the  sanctifying  operation  of  the  Spirit  beginning 
in  regeneration,  and  in  its  progress  producing  a  belief  in 
the  truth,  these  believers  were  elected.  Here  we  are 
not  only  told,  that  they  were  chosen,  but  also  informed 
how  they  were  chosen.  It  w^ould  be  disregarding  all 
the  laws  of  language  to  suppose,  that  the  sanctification  of 
the  Spirit  here  refers  to  the  state  of  the  persons  addressed 
and  not  to  the  manner  in  which  they  were  chosen. 

From  til e  preceding  Scriptural  fticts  and  consequen- 
ces, we  are  \^'arranted  in  the  conclusion,  that  neither  of 
the  foregoing  kinds  of  Arminian  election,  is  sustained  by 
the  conditions  of  the  text.  And  it  may  be  added  with- 
out any  fear  of  successful  refutation,  that  by  no  literal 
construction  of  language  is  either  of  them  taught  in  the 
New  Testament  in  reference  to  the  Christian  church. 
Show  us  a  single  text  within  the  lids  of  that  volume,, 
which  informs  us,  that  God'^s  electing  or  choosing  men  in 
the  Christian  dispensation,  merely  signifies  making  them 
members  of  the  visible  church,  or  barely  selecting  them 
to  the  enjoyment  of  the  heavenly  inheritance  after  they 
have  believed  and  persevered  in  the  faith  to  the  end  of  life. 
It' there  beany  such  texts,  it  is  freely  confessed,  that 
they  have  not  fallen  within  the  Compaq  of  my  knowledge. 

But  on  tiie  contrary,  the  election  ex])lained  and  vin- 
dicated in  this  discourse,  we  have  taught  in  the  sacred 

•See  note  on  the  13th  puge  of  his  Preface  to  his  Commentary  on    the  E- 
jljistle  to  the  Romans 


245 

volume  in  almost  so  many  words:  ^^He  hath  chosen''  [e- 
lected]  ^"usin  him  before  the  foundation  of  the  world." 
For  vvhat?  merely  that  being  professors  of  Christianity 
we  should  be  conditionally  holy  and  ivithout  blame  be- 
fore hhn  in  love?  No  verily;  but  ^*'that  we  should  be" 
(without  any  peradventure  expressed)  ^%oly  and  with- 
out blame  before  him  in  love."*     But  has  he  chosen  us 
to  be  holy  and  without  blame^  only  after  we  have  lived 
and  died  in  the  faith?  The  contrary  is  obvious.     His 
command  to  Christians  while  here,  is  to  be  holyf  and 
blameless^'t — the  sons  of  God  without  rebuke.     But  how 
was  this  election,  made  in  design  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world  executed  in  time?  Merely  by  making  men 
members  of  the  visible  church,  as  is  one  Arminian  hypo- 
thesis,  or  introducing  them  into  heaven  after  they  have 
lived  and  died  in  the  faith  as  is  the  other?    Neither  of 
the  two.     Let  the  Bible  answer:  ^^God  hath — chosen 
you"  (not  after,  but)  ^^IN  sanctificationofthe  Spirit  and 
"belief  of  the  truth." 

And  this  Bible  view  of  election,  is  entirely  exempt 
from  any  objections,  that  can  be  legitimately  urged  from 
the  deductions  of  reason: — 

It  contemplates  man  from  first  to  last  in  the  full  pos- 
session of  his  natural  liberty.  The  theory  of  the  Chris- 
tian Preacher,  is  that  God  has  decreed  that  men  shall  be 
free  to  choose  or  refuse  the  offered  Gospel;  that  he  em- 
ploys the  best  possible  moral  means  to  induce  them  to 
escape  from  death  and  choose  life;  and  that  coeternally, 
and  in  agreement,  with  his  foreknowledge  of  their  choo- 
sing or  refusing,  he  has  unconditionally  determined  ei- 
ther to  elect  them  or  to  pass  them  by;  and  hence  it  is 
undeniably  evident  that  according  to  this  system  no  man 
is  passed  by  in  the  operation  of  electing  mercy?  but  such 
as  resisting  the  best  means  employed  by  a  gracious  God 
for  their  recovery,  will  not  come  to  Christ  to  receive  the 
electing  regeneration  of  his  sanctifying  Spirit.  He  has 
eternally  and  unconditionally  determined  to  elect  them' 
that  will  come,  and  he  has  eternally  and  unconditionally 

*Literally  from  the  original:  He  hath   chosen  \:%—to  be  holy  and  without 
Warn?,  8cc,         +1  Pet.  i.  15.         tPhil.  \'u  15. 


246 

decreed  to  pass  them  by  that  will  not.  If  we  would 
only  say  that  such  a  decree  is  conditional,  even  the  Ar- 
minian  himself  could  not  but  acknowledge  the  thing  de- 
creed to  be  in  itself  reasonable.  Why  then  should  he  ob- 
ject, when  we  argue,  that  God  is  so  perfect,  as  to  fore- 
know and  foredetermine  the  same  thing  with  absolute 
certainty  without  any  conditions  and  consequences  pre- 
ceding and  following  each  other  in  the  operations  of  the 
Infinite  mind? 

Nor  can  the  stale  objection,  thatif  God  have  decreed  a 
particular  number  to  be  lost,  they  must  be  lost,  con- 
stantly urged  against  the  doctrine  of  election  as  exhi- 
bited by  the  ]>atrons  of  the  Calvinian  philosophy,  be 
intelligently  made  against  the  theory  here  explained  and 
defended.  Because  it  is  supposed,  that  God  decrees, 
not  to  influence  men  either  directly  or  indirectly  to  the 
soul  destroying  sin  of  rejecting  the  Gospel,  but  after 
employing  with  them,  motives  infinite  and  eternal,  to  in- 
duce a  different  choice,  simply  to  svjfer  them  to  choose 
as  he  eternally  foreknew,  that  in  the  best  system  of  mo- 
ral government  they  certainly  woidd,  and  that  he  has 
decreed  their  destruction,  not  because  he  delights  in 
misery,  but  because  it  is  the  just  desert  of  their  chosen 
transgression,  and  demanded  for  the  discipline  of  the 
moial  universe. 

Suppose  that  God  had  not  foreknown,  that  they  would 
neglect  the  Gospel,  and  that  he  employed  with  them  no 
moral  means  either  for  or  against  their  acceptance  of  its 
mercies,  then  all  could  not  but  admit,  that  he  did  not 
influence  them  to  choose  wrong.  Again,  suppose  that 
after  being  for  a  period  of  his  existence  ignorant  of  their 
fatal  choice,  he  siiotiid  !)y  some  means  become  informecl 
of  the  certainty  of  that  fact^  then  it  would  be  equally  e- 
vident,  that  simply  foreknowing  the  event,  could  cer- 
tainly exert  no  in/luence  in  its  ])roduction.  And  final- 
ly, suppose  he  should  decree  to  su  ircr  it  lo  be  j  list  as  he  fore- 
saw it  would  be,  how  can  it  be  demonstrated,  that  in 
thus  decreeing  he  would  become  any  more,  an  agent  in 
producing  or  modifying  its  existence?  But  according  to 
tlie  theory  here  advocated,  God  is  not  supposed  to  de 


247 

termine  even  to  suffer  a  soul  to  sin,  and  be  lost,  without 
employing  the  means  provided  in  the  best  system  of  mo- 
ral operations  for  prevention  and  recovery.  With  what 
khid  of  intelligence  then  can  it  be  urged  agahist  us,  that 
if  God  have  decreed  to  passanysinner  by  in  the  act  of  his 
electing  sane tifi cation,  that  there  is  therefore  imposed 
on  the  transgressor  some  fatal  necessity  that  he  must  sin 
and  be  lost?  1  hose  that  are  disposed  to  advance  against 
us  that  trite  objec  ion,  are  bound  to  demonstrate,  that 
God  can  not  decree  to  suffer  wicked  men  to  act  as  he 
foreknows  they  will  choose,  without  interfering  with 
their  natural  liberty  of  choice,  or  in  other  words,  to  de- 
monstrate, that  he  cannot  determine,  that  they  shall  be 
free  without  destroying  their  liberty!!! 

Nor  can  it  be  rationally  argued,  that  this  Bible  the- 
ory of  personal  election  involves  God  in  the  authorship 
of  sin  or  in  the  production  of  misery,  since  in  his  crea- 
tion and  government  it  is  supposed,  that  he  pursues  the 
very  best  system  of  moral  operations  to  prevent  the  fall, 
and  after  the  fall  to  induce  men  to  escape  from  its  ruiii, 
and  to  accept  his  sanctifying,  electing,  and  justifying 
mercy,  presented  in  the  Gospel. 

Imagine  at  the  liead  of  an  army  raised  for  the  purpose 
of  defending  an  invaded  empire,  a  general  placed,  who 
by  the  inspiration  of  some  supernatural  power,  is  in- 
formed of  all  the  future  certainties  of  his  intended  cam- 
paign. He  knows,  that  if  all  his  men  would  obey  his 
commands,  the  enemy  would  be  defeated  without  his  sus- 
taining the  loss  or  the  injury  of  a  single  individual,  but 
at  the  same  time,  he  is  apprized  of  the  certainty  that 
some  of  his  soldiers  will  not  obey  his  most  wise  and  rea- 
sonable orders,  but  by  disobedience  will  render  them- 
selves proper  subjects  for  the  necessary  penalties  of  mar- 
tial law:  that  however  by  the  disobedience  and  the  pun- 
ishment of  these  offenders,  whom  he  foreknows  by  name, 
he  can  maintain  authority  and  promote  obedience  and 
order  throughout  his  camp,  and  linally,  obtain  success  in 
defending  the  lives  and  liberties  of  his  countrymen. 
With  all  these  events  as  certainties  before  him,  he  de- 
termines his  whole  system  of  warfare.     He  resolves  to 


kI4S 

govern  his  army  in  tlie  best  possible  mariner  to  secure 
the  obedience  of  all,  and  to  siiiFer  these  men,  \vhom  he 
foreknew  certai)ily  to  become  disobedient,  to  choose  the 
very  course  which  he  foresees  they  will,  and  also  to  pu- 
nish their  insubordination  as  a  means  of  preventing  others 
from  similar  disalFection.  He  considers  it  better  to 
determine  to  sufler  and  punish  the  irregularity  of 
the  few,  who  he  foresees  will,  in  despite  of  the  best 
means  of  prevention,  disobey,  and  t-uis  to  impress  the 
necessity  of  obedience  on  the  minds  of  all  the  others, 
and  so  maintain  the  discipline  of  his  army  and  save  his 
country  from  destruction,  than  to  disband  his  forces  on 
account  of  these  foreseen  evils,  and  surrender  his  country 
to  the  ravages  of  an  invading  foe. 

Now  every  event  connected  with  the  management  of 
this  army,  is  supposed  to  be  elected  or  determined  be- 
fore hand  by  the  general,  yet  who  can  say,  that  any 
thing  is  so  elected  or  determined  as  to  implicate  him  in 
the  prodiiction,  either  of  the  disobedience  or  the  suffer- 
ing introduced  into  the  camp?  The  men  are  supposed  to 
be  left  entirely  at  liberty  to  choose  obedience  or  disobe- 
dience. He  is  considered  as  presenting  the  best  motives 
to  induce  their  choice  to  a  direction  in  which  there  would 
be  neither  transgression  nor  misery.  The  cause  in  which 
he  pursues  this- best  system  of  plans  and  operations,  isa- 
mong  the  most  sacred  on  earth,  the  preservation  of  life 
and  liberty. 

Though  in  tips  supposed  system  of  warfare,  every  e- 
vent  is  determined  by  tlie  commander,  it  is  submitted  to 
the  judgment  of  every  reflecting  man,  who  admits  at  all 
the  lawfulness  of  defensive  war,  whether  there  is  invol- 
ved in  this  plan  any  infringement  of  rational  liberty,  or 
any  de])artMre  from  the  benignest  humanity,  and  whe- 
ther, all  things  considered,  it  is  not  far  better,  that  the 
general  should  not  only  foreknow,  but  also  in  agreement 
with  his  foreknowledge  of  all  the  possibilities  connected 
with  the  subject,  fore- determine  every  event  of  his  sub- 
sequent operations  according  to  wisdom  and  benevolence, 
than  10  close  his  eyes  to  future  certainties,  refuse  to  form 
any  plan  for  his  future   management,  and  surrender  all 


249 

tht  concerns  of  his  army,  and  with  them  all  the  interests 
of  his  country,  to  the  wild  vagaries  of  chance,  and  thus 
to  pursue  a  system  of  trackless  and  traceless  confusion. 
So  it  is  believed,  that  Deity  to  effect  the  greatest  possi- 
ble created  good,  prefers  the  best  and  the  wisest  plan  of 
moral  liberty  to  no  plan  at  all,  as  much  as  he  prefers  or- 
der to  confusion,  and  knowledge  to  ignorance. 

Some  perhaps  will  imagine,  that  humanity  in  the  gen- 
eral, would  require  him  to  dismiss  from  his  ranks,  the  ||^ 
particular  men,  whom  he  foreknows  to  become  certainly  ^ 
rebellious  if  continued  in  his  camp,  before  they  have  diso- 
beyed, and  thus  to  prevent  both  their  crimes  and  their 
sufferings,  and  that  so  God  to  be  fully  vindicated  in  his  plan 
from  the  authorship  of  sin,  ought  to  be  supposed  not  to 
create  a  single  being,  knowing  that  disobedience  howe- 
ver chosen,  and  eternal  misery  however  imperiously  de- 
manded by  the  demerit  of  his  transgressions,  would  be 
his  certain  conduct,  and  his  certain  interminable  destiny. 
Though  this  objection  bears  with  as  much  weight  against 
any  other  theory,  which  recognizes  the  eternal  fore- 
knowledge of  Deity,  as  against  the  general  doctrine  of 
this  discourse,  we  will  not  take  this  advantage  of  obviating 
it,  but  will  face  it  fairly,  and  remove  it,  and  will  simply 
request  them  who  urge  it  upon  us  to  do  the  same  if  they 
can. 

Suppose  the  general  knew,  that  if  these  particular 
men  v/ere  sent  home,  and  their  insubordination  and  their 
punishment  were  not  permitted  to  eventuate,  and  be  exhi- 
bited to  the  survey  of  the  whole  camp,  so  as  to  impress 
their  minds  with  fear,  others  would  disobey,  and  that  if 
these^  others  should  also  be  sent  away,  to  prevent  their 
disloyalty,  and  suffering,  their  example  of  punishment 
being  in  that  case  wanting,  others  without  this  exhibi- 
tion of  terror,  would  transgress,  and  that  if  these  should 
be  sent  away,  others  for  the  same  cause  would  disobey^ 
and  so  others,  and  others  indefinitely,  so  that  eventually,  if 
he  did  not  determine  to  suffer  some  to  choose  transgres- 
sion, and  endure  punishment  as  a  terror  to  the  others, 
he  would  finally  have  no  army  to  defend  his  country;  s© 


250 

that  the  question  would  ultimately  be,  whether  his  coun- 
try should  be  lost,  or  he  would  determine  to  endure  the 
crimes,  and  permit  the  punishment  of  a  few  of  his  re- 
bellious soldiery.  Even  so,  if  God  make  the  commission 
of  sin  and  the  infliction  of  punishment  a  means  of  display- 
ing his  wrath,  and  making  his  power  known,  and  of  ex- 
hibiting an  enmmple  to  those  that  after  should  live  un- 
godly, and  if  these  displays  of  wrath  and  power,  and  en- 
samples  of  sullering,  be  made  the  moral  means  of  deterring 
unfallen  beings  from  disobedience,  and  of  awing  some  of  the 
fallen,  so  that  from  fear  they  seek  to  be  restored  to  their 
pristine  allegiance,  and  in  this  manner  he  maintains  the 
harmony  of  the  moral  universe;  if  such  be  the  best  moral 
means  of  confirming  the  intelligent  creation  in  loyalty  to 
their  Maker;  and  finally,  if  those  that  are  actually  brought 
into  being  and  suffered  to  choose  sin  and  endure  misery, 
were  not  they  suffered  to  be  exhibited  as  examples  of  ter- 
ror, to  prevent  the  rest  from  the  violation  of  their  Crea- 
tor'slaw,  others  without  these  exemplifications,  would  sin, 
and  if  the  existence  of  these  had  been  suppressed,  others 
for  the  same  reason  would  have  iiillen  into  transgression, 
and  others,  and  others,  until  the  final  question  is  resol- 
ved into  this:  ^^shall  God  determine  to  suffer  the  sins 
freely  chosen  by  some  of  his  creature's  in  despite  of  all 
the  means  his  wisdom  employs  for  their  prevention,  and 
permit  the  misery,  that  is  the  inevitable  consequence  of 
those  sins  as  the  best  means  of  confirming  all  the  armies 
of  the  moral  creation  in  rectitude  and  happiness,  or  shall 
he  suppress  all  the  happiness  and  glory,  that  shall  arise 
from  the  creation  of  all  the  numberless  worlds  through- 
out the  progress  of  eternity?'^  Now  if  it  would  be  ob- 
viously unreasonable  for  the  general  to  sacrifice  the  li- 
berty, and  the  life,  of  an  empire  to  the  wicked  caprice 
of  a  few  soldiers,  so  it  would  be  equally  unreasonable  for 
Deity  to  relinquish  all  the  happiness  and  glory  of  the 
created  universe,  for  the  guilty  choice  of  a  few  crea- 
tures, that  would  not  by  the  best  moral  motives  be  pre- 
vented from  their  folly. 

Thus  we  find,  that  the  doctrine  of  personal  election, 
not  only  coincides  with  the  letter  of  the  Bible,  but  also 


251 

can  sustain  the  most  rigid  scrutiny  of  reason^  and  justi- 
iiesat  once  in  the  sweetest  harmony^  both  the  wisdom  and 
the  goodness  of  God. 

Having  disposed  of  the  objection  placed  by  the  Ar- 
minian  at  our  door,  in  turn  we  will  try  his  strength  by 
placing  it  at  his.     Arminianism  properly  so  called,  re- 
cognizes the  prescience  of  Deity,  and  therefore  supposes, 
that  in  the  creation  of  moral  beings,  he  had  before  him 
all  the  events  of  their  immortality.     Accordingly,  when 
he  created  Satan,  he  viewed  him  as  ultimately  becoming 
a  sinful  and  eternally  miserable  spirit;  before  he  created 
Adam,  and  before  he   creates  every  individual  of  the 
sons  and  daughters  of  Adam,  he  surveyed  and   surveys 
their  future  character,  and  all  the  interminable  duration 
of  their   happiness   or  misery.     As  agreeably  to  our 
doctrine,  God  has  a  plan,  and  the  best  plan,  and  every 
being  and  event  in  it  has  a  reference  to  the  general  good. 
we   can  systematically  say,  God  mercifully  and  wisely 
suffers  the  existence  of  evil,  as  the  certain  though  not 
the  necessary  imperfection  of  the  best  system  of  moral 
beings,  because,  in  it  there  is  almost  infinitely  more  good 
than  evil,  and  of  consequence,  there  are  more  goodness 
and  glory  displayed  and  more  happiness  enjoyed,  than 
could  otherwise  be  possible.     But  as  the  Arminian  de- 
nies that  God  ever  determined  every  event  in  the  uni- 
verse, no  one  particular  thing  in  creation,  can,   accor- 
ding to  the  supposition,  have  any  reference  to  the  whole. 
The  admission  of  that  reference,  is  at  once  the  full  ac- 
knowledgement of  a  plan,  in  wiiich  God  has  foreordain- 
ed whatsoever  comes  to  pass.     But  if  he  created  beings 
without  any  view  to  the  general  ^oo6.j  he  must  have  cre- 
ated them  for  their  individual  ^ood  or  for  no  good  at 
all.     But  how  could  he  create  them  for  their  individual 
good,  whose  creation  he  foresaw  would  certainly  be  fol- 
lowed by  eternal  sin  and  misery? 

It  were  better  for  Satan,  had  he  never  been  created. 
It  were  better  for  any  lost  man,  had  he  never  been  born. 
This  the  Creator  must  know,  before  he  creates  them,  and 
then  upon  Arminian  principles,  how  could  he  introduce 
them  into  existence  with  any  design  for  their  good,  un- 
less indeed,  w^e  can  suppose,  that  he  intended;,  that  which 


252 

he  knew  would  never  be  accomplished,  or  designed  his 
own  deception.  Yet  the  Arminian  theology  supposes, 
that  God  creates  every  spirit,  that  is  eventually  lost,  with 
all  its  sins,  and  its  everduring  darkness,  chains,  burnings, 
and  agonies  full  before  him.  For  what  purpose? — be- 
cause they  are  the  unavoidable  imperfections  which  at- 
tend the  general  good?  This  the  Arminian  denies,  w  hen 
he  rejects  the  system  of  God's  universal  plan,  and  of  course, 
his  system  supposes,  either  that  God  creates  them  without 
any  purpose,  or  meaning  whatever,  or  else,  that  his  eyes 
are  delighted  with  their  unquenchable  fires,  and  his  ears 
with  the  sounds  of  their  never  ceasing  woes.  When  he 
foreknew,  that  such  would  be  the  eternal  and  miserable 
consequences  of  his  choosing  the  conditions  of  creating 
them,  why  unless  he  have  pleasure  in  sin,  and  in  the 
death  of  the  sinner,  did  he  choose  the  condition  on  which 
turned  all  the  eternal  world  of  sin  and  woe?  So  that  ac- 
cording to  this  theory.  Deity,  either  brought  into  being 
every  lost  spirit  without  any  meaning  in  the  operation, 
or  he  really  preferred,  that  there  should  be  just  the  a- 
mount  of  sin  that  is  actually  perpetrated,  and  misery  that 
is  actually  endured;  just  the  number  of  lost  angels  thatare 
now  reserved  in  chains  of  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of 
the  great  day;  and  just  the  number  of  infatuated  men,  that 
are  actually  living,  and  will  die,  in  the  neglect  of  the  sal- 
vation of  the  Gospel.  Is  a  system  of  theology  drawing 
such  horrible* consequences  in  its  train,  the  divinity  of 
the  Bible,  which  declares  sin  to  be,  the  abominable  thing 
which  God  hates,  and  the  death  of  the  sinner  to  be,  that 
in  which  he  has  no  delight!  O  Reader,  tell  it  not  in 
Gath,  publish  it  not  in  the  i-treets  of  Ashkelon,  the  Ar- 
minian philosophy,  whilst  it  professedly  denies  the  doc- 
trine of  personal  election^  carries  the  doctrine  o^l perso- 
nal reprobation  in  its  bosom,  hidden  indeed  from  the 
passing  eye,  but  still  existing  in'all  the  magnitude  of  life!! 
If  this  philosophy  be  true,  God  created  a  particular  num- 
ber to  be  lost.  He  chose  that  they  should  be  lost,  or 
else  why  did  he  give  them  being  knowing  that  they 
ivoidd  be  lost?  Knowing  that  if  they  were  created,  they 
as  certainly  wo\^ld  be  miserable,   except  he  preferred 


§53 

their  destruction^  why  did  he  not  stay  his  creating  hand? 
But  it  is  said,  the  destruction  of  every  eternally  misera- 
hle  being,  is  the  effect  of  his  own  choice.  True.  This 
however  removes  no  difficulty.  Why/  unless  God  de- 
lights in  sin,  and  has  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked, 
does  he  create  a  beings  which  he  knows  will  certainly 
make  a  choice  of  sin,  and  thus  render  himself  the  sub- 
ject of  eternal  wretchedness?  If  it  were  better  he  had 
never  been  born,  why  was  he  ever  born,  unless  God  de- 
lights in  the  objects  of  sin  and  wretchedness? 

Arminianism  makes  God,  either  act  without  any  mea- 
ning whatever,  or  else  choose  the  very  condition  on 
which  are  suspended  all  the  unbelief  in  the  world,  and 
all  the  misery  that  ever  will  result  from  that  unbelief. 
According  to  the  principles,  which  it  involves.  Deity 
eternally  beheld  the  unbelieving  enduring  eternal  tor- 
ments, upon  the  condition  that  they  would  certainly  die 
in  their  sins,  they  would  die  iu  their  sins  upon  the  con- 
dition^  that  they  would  not  believe  and  obey  the  Gos- 
pel, they  would  not  believe  and  obey  the  Gospel,  upon 
the  condition^  that  they  were  created  in  a  particular 
manner,  and  placed  in  a  particular  state,  and  finally, 
they  would  be  thus  created,  and  thus  placed,  upon  the 
condition^  that  himself  would  choose  their  existence  and 
their  circumstances.  Thus  Arminianism  conducts  us  to 
the  conclusion,  that  God  really  preferred  that  unbelievers 
of  every  grade,  should  be  jist  as  they  are,  and  no  better; 
that  one  man  should  be  a  liar  and  not  a  man  of  veracity; 
that  another  should  be  a  drunkard  and  not  a  man  of  so- 
briety; that  a  third  should  be  a  man  of  blood,  and  not  a 
man  of  innocence;  and  the  same  of  men  of  sin  of  every 
order,  and  character;  for  if  he  did  not  choose  that  they 
should  he  just  so,  why  did  he  create  them  at  all,  or  if  he 
have  not  created  and  governed  them  in  the  best  possible 
manner  to  prevent  sin  and  promote  holiness,  why  unless 
he  chose  that  they  would  be  no  better,  did  he  not  choose 
to  create  and  govern  them  according  to  the  best  possible 
system? 

The  theory  of  the  best  possible  system,  is  the  only 
possible  relief  from  these  Bible  denying,  and  God  accu- 


25i 

sing  consequences;  but  if  the  doctrine  of  the  best  possi- 
ble system  be  true,  the  Bible  doctrine  of  particular  per- 
sonal election,  just  such  as  is  taught  in  tiie  Presbyterian 
Confession  of  Faith,  and  in  the  thirty-nine  articles  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  church,  is  true. 

Reader  since  the  election  here  explained  and  defended 
supposes,  that  in  the  sure  plan  of  the  divine  mercy,  be- 
tAcen  the  use  you  make  of  the  word,  and  providences 
or  God,  and  of  the  common  operations  of  his  Spirit,  and 
your  obtaining  the  special  act  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that 
will  elect  you,  be  entreated  to  come  to  Christ  ?iou\  and 
thus  make  your  calling  and  election  sure.  It  will  be  in 
vain,  that  you  believe  the  doctrine,  if  you  neglect  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  blessings  which  it  conveys.  Come,  and 
be  assured,  that  God  is  both  able  and  ivilling  to  elect  all 
that  will  come.  He  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  who- 
soever Cometh  unto  him,  he  will  in  no  wise  cast  out. 
Come  then,  and  partake  freely  in  the  riches  of  his  elec- 
ting grace.     He  ofiers  to  elect  you.     Will  you  accept  of 


his  electina:  love? 


A'OTE. 

Lest  this  should  be  construed  into  an  odious  and  a 
grou)idless  allusion,  our  authority  shall  be  given,  and  that 
authority  is  none  other,  but  Dr.  Adam  Clarke.  From 
his  preface  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans the  following  is  extracted: 

^•From  the  manner  in  which  this  Epistle  hiis  been  in- 
terpreted, and  applied,  various  most  discordant  and  con- 
flicting opinions  have  originated.  Many  commentators 
forgetting  the  scope  and  design  of  it,  have  applied  that 
to  men  in  general,  which  most  obviously  belongs  to  the 
Jews  as  distinguished  from  the  Gentiles^  and  to  them  only. 
From  this  one  mistake,  the  principal  controversies,  that 
have  agitated  and  divided  the  church  of  Christ,  concer- 
ning the  doctrines  of  unconditional  reprobation  and  e- 
Icction,  have  arisen.  Men  eminent  for  their  talents, 
learning,  and  piety,  have  interpreted  and  applied  thr 


255 

whole  on  this  mistaken  ground.  They  have  been  oppo- 
sed by  others,  not  at  all  their  inferiors,  either  in  religion, 
or  learning,  who  not  attending  to  the  scope  of  the  A- 
postle,  have  rather  argued  from  the  perfections  of  the 
divine  nature,  and  the  general  concurrent  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  thus  proved  that  such  doctrines  can  not  com- 
port with  those  perfections,  nor  with  the  analogy  of  faith; 
and  that  the  Apostle  is  to  be  interpreted  according  to 
these,  and  not  according  to  the  apparent  grammatical 
import  of  The  phraseology  which  he  employ  s.^^ 

"To  compose  these  difterences,  and  do  justice  to  the  Aposile,  and  set  an. 
important  portion  of  the  word  of  God  in  its  true  and  genuine  light;  Dr.  Johrs 
Taylor  of  Norwich,  a  divme,  who  yielded  to  few  in  coinmand  of  temper,  be- 
nevoient  feeling,  and  deep  acquaintance  with  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  Scrip, 
tures,  undertook  the  elucidation  ot  this  much  controverted  Epistle.  The  result 
of  his  labours  was  a  paraphrase,  and  notes  on  the  whole  book,  to  which  is 
prefixed  a  j^ey  to  the  Apostolic  Writings." — "T/bis  Key  is,  in  them.ain,  a  most 
invaluable  work;  and  has  done  great  justice  to  the  subject.  Christians,  whe- 
ther advocates  for  generator  particular  redemption,  might  have  derived  great 
service  from  this  work,  in  explaining  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans:  but  the 
author's  creed,  who  was  an  AR.IAN  (for  he  certainly  can  not  be  ranked  with 
modern  Unitarians,*)  has  prevented  many  from  consulting  his  book  " 

Dr.  Clarke  candidly  acknowledges,  that  before  the  appearance  of  thiy 
Unitarian  guide,  the  apostle  was  not  mterpreted  by  Arminians  according  to 
'*t/je  apparent  grammatical  hriport  of  the phrasedogy  ii:btch  he  emplovs"/.'' 
This  is  always  the  killing  sin  of  heresy:  but  it  is  the  part  of  the  humble 
believer  togo  whithersoever  the  most  natural,  and  obvious  construction  of  the 
Bibie  will  carry  him,  and  net  presume  to  say,  that  when  God  speaks  one 
thing  he  means  another  The  object  of  the  Christian  Preacher  is,  to  prove, 
that  when  we  do  this,  we  also  act,  in  the  strictest  accordance,  with  Christian 
philosophy.  It  is  believed,  that  the  most  literal,  and  the  most  natural  sense 
of  the  Bible,  and  the  most  accurate  process  of  moral  reasoning,  will  always 
harmonize;  because  the  Bible  is  given  by  the  author  of  reason. 

Dr  John  Taylor's  theory  advocated,  and  partially  adopted  by  Dr.  Adam 
Clai-ke,  is  briefly  this:  In  the  Old  Teftament  the  terms  saved,  bought,  re- 
deetned,  called,  ELECT,  created,  nnode,  farmed,  born,  and  sanctified,  when 
applied  to  the  Jewish  nation,  iimply  mean  the  act  in  v  hich  they  were 
separated  from  the  world,  to  the  professed  visible  membership  of  the  Old 
Testament  Church;  and  so,  when  these  same  terms  are  employed  in  the  New- 
Testament,  in  relation  to  the  New  Testament  dispensation,  they  merely  sig- 
nify the  act  by  which  men  whether  Jews  or  Gentiles,  become  the  professed 
members  of  the    Christian  church. 

This  Unitarian  theory  takes  two  propositions  for  grantedr^r^f,  that  these 
terms  among  the  Jews  were  understood  to  refer  wholly  to  visible  member- 
ship in  their  national  covenant,  and  secondly,  that  they  have  a  corresponding 
application  in  relation  to  the  Christian  church. 

-It  is  a  petitio  principii  [begging  the  question]  in  a  douhle  sense.  In  the 
first  place,  it  is  not  generally  admitted,  that  such  is  always  the  meaning  of  the 
tern'S  in  relation  to  the  Jews,  and  m  the  second  place,  if  it  were  admitted,  it 


*The  term  Unitarian  picperly  signifies  all,  who  deny  the  Supreme  divini- 
to  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  personality  <  f  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  ])roperly  in- 
cludes Arians  as  well  as  Socimavis.  The  term  is  however  more  generally 
applied  to  Socinians. 


256 

does  not  involve  the  consequence,  that  these  terms  must  mean  nothing  more 
in  the  Christian  dispensation.  If  the  Jewish  Church  was  but  the  shadow 
of  good  things  to  come  in  rhe  Christian  church,  then  if  in  the  termer  these 
terms  only  referred  to  a  protession  of  religion,  in  the  latter  they  ought  to  be 
considered  to  signify  the  realiry  of  which  a  profession  is  made. 


APPENDIX. 

To  Joseph  Lybrand,  Samuel  Merwin,  Samuel  Doughty,  John  Lednum,  EU- 
sha  Andrews,  Munning  Force,  Thomas  F  Sargent,  'I'h^nuis  Mill-r,  W 
W.  Wallace,  and  Thomas  Dunn,  Committee  of  publication;  and  John 
Clarke  Editor  oi'  the  late  Religious  Messenger.  A 

In  your  Religious  Mcjssenger  of  Dec  6'h,  1827,  by  way  of  Editorial  re- 
marks you  say,  "An  Arn^inian  is  able  but  not  nxsiliing  to  enter  conrr.versj 
with  Mr.  C  while  his  remarks  are  so  wide  a  dejiarture  from  the  language 
of  a  Christian  minis::er."  If  "An  Arininian"  wMshed  to  be  treated  as  a  gen- 
t  eman,  and  aChri^^tian  he  ought  to  have  avoided  writing  down  falsehoods, 
and  making  anv  odious  pers'^nal  allusion  founded  on  falsehoods.  The  wri- 
ter, the  commiriee,  and  ihe  Conference  that  can  make  themselves  the  ped- 
lars of  the  small  wares  of  personal  defamation,  have  no  particular  claims  to 
the  treatment  due  to  eirher  gentlemen  or  Chiistigns.  As  to  the  complaint 
of  unbecoming  language,  any  one  who  reads  the  Nos.  of  the  Religious 
Messenger  alluded  to  will  see  verified  tlie  proverb,  "the  real  thief  will  always 
cry  out,  "Stop  thief  the  loudest."  W'e  are  told,  "An  Arrninian  is  able  but  not 
xaiUtug*^ — he  retires  from  the  field  out  of  pure  meekness  and  modesty  It 
must  be  a  Moses  like  meekness  and  a  virgin-like  modesty,  that  can  retire 
from  *he  arena  when  convicted  before  the  world  of  IGNORANCE  and 
FALSEHOOD.  [See  remarks  Christian  Preacher.  Nos   4  and  5]. 

••This  subject,  '  you   however  intormed    us,  "will    be  made    plainer  be- 
fore Jeremiah  has  concluded,"     But, 

Quid  dignum  ranio  tuiit  hie  Promisor,  Hiatu? 
In  the  Messenger  of  Dec.  27,  ^he  hero  appears  with   doubtless  lofty  ex- 
pectations.    But  alashow  changed!  His  golden  days  were  gone!  You  tell  him 
"that  his  second  paper  is  published  more  from   the   previous    notice  of  its 
forthcoming,"  "than  otherwise  " 

Currente  Rota  cur  urceus  exit? 
It  was  a  lecture  on  style.  But  thsau-hor  was  told  by  the  editorial  faculty 
"The  style  of  Mr.  Campbell  is  not  good,  but  Jeren^iah  has  not  mended  it," 
A  raw  lad  who  had  never  seen  the  whole  world,  in  passing  along  the  high- 
way espying  among  a  number  of  other  marvellous  things,  an  animal  with 
iong  ears,  exclaimed  with  astonishment  *'wbat  fine  horns  that  coio  has!''' 
on  coming  up  a  little  nearer,  again  he  called  out,  '*But  tbat\  a  queer  cow/'"' 
And  finally,  feeling  the  cars  with  his  hand,  he  remarked  very  sagely 
2.ndY)VLt\\ct]ca.\\v,"s(>ft  is  your  hir?!  poor  beastP**  So  it  appears,  the  Editor 
and 'he  Committee  of  the  Religious  Messenger,  once  thought  Jeremiah  had 
a  fine  head  and  horns.  On  approaching  however  they  began  to  vhink  he 
was  af]iiecr  be.ist  for  a  cow;  and  finally  discovered  the  secret,  that  he  was  an 
animal  'with  sof;  horns!!  This  argues  more  sagacity  in  the  Editorial  Commit, 
tee  of  the  Lunference  of  Philadelphia,  than  we  had  supposed  they  possessed. 
We  have  received,  'hrough  the  mediun\  of  the  post-office  a  small  abusive 
and  anonymous  pa'nphlet,  purporting  to  be  a  reply  to  the  appendix  of  the 
Christian  Preacher  No.  8.  apparently  written  by  some  Methodist  in  Smyrna, 
Del.  The  performance  is  such  as  might,  if  placed  in  the  hands  of  some  De- 
laware attorney,  possibly  elevate  its  silly  and  obscure  author  to  the  distinction 
of  the  whipping  post  Anon»mous  attacks  on  persotial  character,  injure  e- 
ven  a  good  cause,  and  always  make  a  bad  one  icorse.  The  author  and  his 
pamphlet  are  alike  below  any  other  kind  of  jiotice.  Where  nothing  better 
is  expected,  falsehood  is  harmlem- 


THE  CHRIS!  IAN  PREACHER 


Vol.  1.  J2PRIL,  1828.  N°.  11, 


Thy  kingdom  come.     Thy  will  be  done  in  earth,  as  it  is  in  hea« 
Tren. — Math.  vi.  10. 

Tlie  efficacy  of  prayer  in  the  conversion  of  the  world. 

Since  in  this  work  it  is  advocated^  that  in  pursuing 
the  best  plan  for  recovering  the  greatest  possible  num- 
ber of  lost  men^  God  regenerates  all  such,  and  general- 
ly,  none  b^t  such,  as  choose  to  accept  his  atoning  and  re- 
generating mercy,  it  is  probably  asked  by  some,   ^^How 
can  the  prayer  of  one  man  operate  upon  the  conversion 
of  another?    If  the  man  be  already  willing,  then  accor- 
ding to  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  Preacher,  God  will 
certainly  regenerate  him  without  the  interference  of  a- 
nother;  and  if  he  be  not,  then  his  change  is  out  of  the 
ordinary  course  of  God's  regenerating  operations. ^^     Al- 
though it  be  true,  that  if  a  man  be  now  willing,  a  new 
heart  will  be  given  him,  even  if  he  should  not  be  made 
the  subject  of  another's  prayer,  and  although,  if  he  be 
not  willing,  it  be  equally  certain,   that  in  the   usual 
course  of  dispensing  his  regenerating  blessings,  God  will 
not  change  him,  until  by  the  common  means  of  grace, 
addressed  to  him  as  a  moral  agent,  he  consent  importu- 
nately and  perseveringly  to  implore  divine  assistance 
to  believe;  yet,  in  answer  to  the  prayer  of  fervent  faith, 
God  can  consistently  with  the  constitution  of  his  moral 
government,  operate  upon  the  minds  of  men  more  power- 
fully in    the  common  strivings  of  his  Spirit  to  produce 
this  willingness,  than  he  could  without  such  prayer;  and 
also,  consistently  with  the  fact,  that  it  is  the  way  of  God 
generally  to  regenerate  such  only,  as  from  a  sense  of 
guilt  and  danger,  seek  his  salvation,  he  may  transcend 
the  boundaries  of  his  usual  operations,  and  in  answer  to 
importunate  and  pious  prayer,  made  for  another;  in  a 
moment,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  without  any  previ- 
ous work  of  conviction  or  alarm,  make  the  most  thought- 
less  human  being  the  subject  of  iiis  regenerating  power. 


258 

The  objection  falls  before  the  following  propositions: 

1 .  Prayer  for  others  may  becomeM  means  of  producing 
in  them  a  willingness  to  accept  the  Gospel;  and 

2.  In  answer  to  the  pious  prayer  of  others,  God  may 
depart  from  his  usual  mode  of  operations  y  and  reiew 
the  careless  and  the  wicked  without  their  previous  wil- 
lingness. 

Both  these  propositions  are  legitimately  deducible  from 
the  general  truth,  that  God  will  accomplish  certain  e- 
vents  in  answer  to  prayer,  which  he  otherwise  would 
not.  That  in  his  eternal  plan  of  moral  operations,  prayer 
finds  a  place  in  the  production  of  events,  is  an  acknow- 
ledged doctrine  of  the  Bible.  If  God  foretell  the  res- 
toration of  Israel  from  all  their  captivities,  he  also  adds 
as  an  essential  means  of  fulfilment,  /  will  yet  for  this  he 
enquired  of  by  the  house  of  Israel  to  do  it  for  them:  If 
he  promise  to  the  Son,  the  heathen  for  his  inheritance 
and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  his  possession,  he 
says,  ASK  and  Iivill  give  thee.  And  if  he  reveal  in  the 
sure  word  of  prophecy,  that  the  kingdoms  of  this  ivorld 
will  become  the  kingdoms  of  our  Lord  and  his  Christ* 
he  also  directs  us  to  pray,  thy  kingdom  come. 

Blessings  are  provided  without  restriction  in  answer  to 
prayer.  Ask  and  ye  shall  receive;  seek  and  ye  shall  fin  d; 
knock  and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you.  For  every  one 
that  asketh  receiveth;  and  he  that  sccketh  findeth;  and 
to  him  that  knocketh  it  shall  be  opened.  But  is  this  sup- 
posed to  relate  exclusively  to  personal  hlessings?  The 
supposition  is  refuted  when  we  are  informed,  that 
WHATSOEVER  ye  shall  ask  the  Father  in  my  name, 
he  will  give  it  you.  We  are  also  divinely  taught,  that 
the  effectual  fervent  prayer  of  a  righteous  7nan  availetk 
much  when  made  for  others  in  sickness  and  in  sin.  Is 
any  sick  says  the  Spirit?  let  him  call  for  the  elders  of 
the  cJiurch*  and  let  them  pray  over  him.  And  the  pray- 
er  of  faith  shall  save  the  sick;  and  the  Lord  shall  raise 
him  up.  If  he  have  committed  sins  they  shall  be  forgi- 
ven him. 

In  al^  these  cases,  it  is  obviously  implied,  that  prayer 
is  considered  efficient  as  a  means  of  producing  events, 


259 

which  without  it,  would  be  different.  In  some  of  the 
passages  just  cited,  and  alluded  to,  temporal  blessings  are 
promised.  But  if  God  give  temporal  good  things  in  an- 
swer to  prayer,  how  much  more  spiritual?  If  lie  so  far 
regard  the  petitions  of  the  pious  as  to  heal  the  sickness  of 
the  body,  how  much  more  will  he  cure  the  soul  of  its 
moral  maladies?  If  when  besought  by  the  house  of  Israel, 
he  will  restore  them  from  all  their  captivities,  how  much 
rather  deliver  souls  from  the  slavish  dominion  of  Satan? 
But  according  to  some  of  these  texts,  spiritual  gifts  are 
evidently  communicated  as  the  consequences  of  prayer, 
and  hence,  the  doctrine  that  God  dispenses  the  blessings 
of  his  grace,  as  well  as  the  bounties  of  his  providence  at 
the  fervent  entreaties  of  the  pious,  ou,e:ht  to  be  acknow- 
ledged as  a  truth  of  revelation.     And  if  so,  he  may 

1.  Employ  means  in  answer  to  i^rayer,  which  by  con- 
victions and  alarms,  may  constrain  the  most  careless  and 
the  most  obdurate  to  seek  the  regeneration  and  the  re- 
demption of  the  Gospel;  and  thus  prayer  may  become  the 
instrument  of  producing  a  willingness  to  accept  the  terms 
of  salvation.  With  the  mighty  works  performed  in  a 
Chorazin,  a  Bethsaida,  and  a  Capernaum,  he  may  so  ope- 
rate on  aSv^dom,  a  Tyre,  and  a  Sidon,  as  to  induce  them 
to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come,  and  seek  a  saving  re- 
pentance; and  still,  mightier  works  of  conviction  and  a- 
larm,  he  may  perform,  to  secure  the  repentance  of  a  Cho- 
razin, a  Bethsaida,  and  a  Capernaum.  At  the  fervent 
supplications  of  his  people,  from  heaven,  he  may  flash 
terror  on  the  e^^esof  a  persecuting  Saul,  unti]  trembling 
and  astonished,  he  shall  anxiously  enquire.  Lord  what 
loilt  thou  have  me  to  do?  Who  can  say  that  Deity  can 
not;  and  that  when  addressed  in  the  devout  supplications 
of  his  church  universally,  he  will  not,  exert  on  the  hearts 
of  all  flesh,  such  a  resistless  convicting  and  alarming  power, 
as  shall  prepare  them  for  seeking  and  finding  that  renew- 
ing of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  is  at  once  demanded  and 
offered  by  the  Saviour?  The  thunders  of  his  power  ivho 
can  imderstand?  Or  he  may, 

2.  do  more.     By  a  Sovereign  act  of  his  power,  when 
fervently  invoked  by  the  prayer  of  his  people,  he  may 


260 

for  any  thing  we  know,  consistently  with  all  the  perfec- 
tions of  his  moral  nature,  and  the  best  interests  of  his  mo- 
ral kingdom,  in  some  cases,  desert  the  nsual  ways  of  dis- 
pensing his  grace,  and  renew  thousands  and  millions, 
without  preparing  their  hearts  by  any  previous  convic- 
ting and  alarming  operations. 

Having  beneath  his  immense  and  eternal  survey,  just 
the  number  for  whom  the  prayer  of  faith  would  certainly 
be  offered,  he  may  have  eternally  determined,  so  to  affect 
their  minds  by  the  common  workings  of  his  Spirit,  as  to 
bow  them  before  the  footstool  to  invoke  his  salvation;  or 
by  a  less  usual  demonstration  of  his  mercy,  to  reinstate 
in  their  souls  the  lost  conformity  to  their  Maker's  image, 
without  pursuing  his  ordinary  mode  of  antecedent  ope- 
rations. 
These  positions  are  not  only  consistent  with  reason  and 
Scripture,  but  are  apparently  suppoi'ted  by  facts.  In 
seasons  of  revivals  of  religion,  when  cluirches  become  a- 
wakedfrom  their  slumbers,  and  offer  prayers  importunate 
and  persevering  for  all  around  them,  the  very  atmos- 
phere becomes  consecrated  by  their  breath,  and  fre- 
quently, an  unaccountable  impression  is  made  on  the 
minds  of  men,  who  do  not  frequent  the  places  of  prayer, 
or  mingle  in  the  courts  of  God  with  the  great  congrega- 
tion. Some  of  these  neglecters  of  this  great  salvation, 
whilst  pursuing  their  usual  avocations,  beyond  the  rca^'h 
of  any  visible  means,  and  without  being  affected  in  the 
least  by  any  cliange  in  temporal  circumstances,  have 
been  suddenly  seized  with  such  misgivings  of  mind,  and 
stings  of  conscience,  and  forebodings  of  future  wrath,  as 
have  driven  them  from  their  worldly  ])ursuits  to  seek  on 
asylum  in  the  sanctuary,  which  the}^  had  long  deserted, 
and  dispised;and  to  persevere  in  seeking,  until  they  have 
found  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  sprinkling 
of  that  blood,  which  spcaketh  better  things  than  the 
blood  of  Abel;  whilst  others  of  the  same  character,  in 
such  seasons,  are  sometimes  reported  as  having  been 
changed  from  Satan  to  God  by  a  single  stroke  of  tlie  di- 
vine mercy,  without  any  appeal  to  their  conscience^,  or 
address  to  their  fears.  Thus  He  is  often  found  by  them 
who  seek  him  nor. 


261 

This  subject  most  naturally  introduces  us  to  some  re- 
flections  on  the  efficiency  of  prayer^  in  the  conversion  of 
the  world. 

The  earth  is  the  Lord's,  and  the  fulness  thereof.  All 
its  nations,  as  well  as  the  beasts  of  its  mountains,  and  the 
cattle  upon  its  ten  thousand  hills  are  his.  The  promise 
has  passed  the  lips  of  truth,  that  the  mountain  of  the  Lord's 
house  shall  be  established  in  the  top  of  the  mountains, 
and  be  exalted  above  the  hills;  and  that  all  nations  shall 
flow  to  it;  and  that  to  the  Saviour  shall  the  gathering  of 
the  people  be;  yet  in  the  accomplishment  of  these 
grand  events,  the  glory  of  the  latter  day,  prayer  is  recog- 
nized by  the  word  of  truth  as  an  indispensable  instru- 
ment. It  is  indeed  one  of  the  deep  things  of  God,  why 
the  petitions  of  mortals  should  give  direction  and  impetus 
to  omnipotence.  But  certain  it  is,  and  it  is  a  truth  e- 
nough  for  us  to  know,  that  infinite  wisdom,  by  a  strange 
identification,  has  associated  the  converting  energies  of 
that  power,  which  garnished  the  heavens,  balances  the 
earth,  and  rolls  unnumbered  worlds  and  suns  along  in 
their  orbits,  with  the  prayrful  aspirations  of  the  humblest 
and  meanest  penitent. 

How  exalted  the  privilege  of  him,  who  can  offer  the 
prayer  of  pious  faith!  Angels  sung,  over  the  plains  of 
Bethlehem,  the  Saviours  advent,  they  strengthened  him 
in  the  agonies  of  the  garden;  they  no  doubt  filled  the 
heavens  over  his  head  as  he  passed  from  Gethsemane  to 
the  judgment  seat,  and  thence  to  Calvary;  watched  his 
cross,  and  sounded  their  dirges  over  his  sepulchre.  And 
now  their  armies  bend  before  their  Maker  and  wait  with 
reverence  to  hear  his  commands,  or  swiftly  move  with 
rapturous  joy  to  perform  the  messages  of  redeeming  mer- 
cy, accounting  any  agency  in  the  accomplishment  of 
that  great  salvation,  which  the  Saviour  died  to  secure, 
an  honour  which  demands  their  praise  in  the  loudest  an- 
thems. Whilst  engaged  in  prayer  for  the  conversion  of 
men,  the  believer  is  exalted  to  participate  in  a  work  in 
which  angels  and  God  delight,  and  a  work  which  strange 
to  tell,  the  Almighty  Majesty  himself  with  all  the  un- 
numbered myriads  of  angelic  hosts  in  his  train,  chooses 


262 

not  to  consummate  but  with  the  co-operating  agency  of 
saints  on  earth. 

And  if  the  privilege  of  co-operating  with  angels  and 
God  be  exalted,  so  also  is  the  object  to  be  effected  by  the 
co-operation  ^rand — nothing  less  than  the  revolution  of 
the  ivorld  from  Satan  to  God.  It  is  not  merely  to  save 
our  globe  from  the  impiety  of  the  fooFs  creed,  ''There 
is  no  Gody^^  nor  from  the  Satanic  delusions  of  magic,  in- 
cantations, soothsaying,  and  witchcraft:  nor  from  idoli- 
zing the  luminaries  of  the  skies,  the  shades  of  departed 
heroes,  lifeless  forms  of  wood  and  stone,  birds  and  beasts 
and  creeping  things,  the  fruits  of  the  field,  and  the  herbs 
of  the  garden,  and  all  the  thirty  thousand  forms  of  gloo- 
my superstition;  but  to  guaranty  the  rights  of  consci- 
ence as  existing  not  between  man  and  his  fellows,  but 
between  man  and  his  Maker;  to  restore  justice  and  mer- 
cy to  the  society  of  men;  to  elevate  one  half  of  the  human 
kind  from  the  abjectedness  of  slaves  to  the  dignity  of 
companions:  and  above  all,  to  save  from  the  woes  of  an 
eternal  hell,  a  whole  world  of  ruined  men,  and  exalt  them 
to  the  unspeakable  felicities  of  an  eternal  heaven,  is  the 
object  to  be  achieved  by  the  prayers  of  the  faithful. 
Compared  with  these  the  conquests  of  a. Cyrus,  an  Al- 
exander, a  Cjt' sar,  and  a  Bonaparte  are  more  insignifi- 
cant than  grains  of  dross,  compared  with  globes  of  gold, 
or  than  sparks  of  light,  shaken  from  the  wing  of  the  fire 
fly,  compared  with  suns.  Eternity  stamps  infinite  worth 
on  a  single  soul,  gained  in  the  glorious  conquest.  To 
know  what  is  gained  in  the  value  of  one  soul,  we  should 
be  able  to  estimate  the  amount  of  joy,  which,  over  every 
sifuier  that  repenteth,  reverberates  from  vault  to  vault 
through  the  heavenly  courts;  to  pursue  the  redeemed 
spirit  as  it  soars  upwards  and  upwards,  from  glory  to 
glorvin  its  opproximationsto  the  unattainable  perfections 
of  the  infinite  Glory;  and  above  all,  to  compute  the  price 
paid  in  the  sufferings  of  the  Son  of  God,  when  he  endu- 
red the  sorrows  of  the  garden  and  the  agonies  of  the  cross. 
But  it  is  for  minds  only,  that  can  comprehend  the  eter- 
nal aggregate  of  joy,  that  shall  fill  heaven  for  a  world  of 
repenting  sinners;  the  amount  of  all  the  exceeding  and  e- 


^^63 

ternal  weights  of  glory  that  shall  rest  upon  the  whole  ar- 
my of  ransomed  souls;  and  the  eternal  weight  of  woe  that 
pressed  the  Saviour  when  pronouncing  it  finished  he 
sunk  from  the  cross  to  the  sepulchre — it  is  for  such  minds 
only 5  to  estimate  the  conversion  of  the  whole  living  fa- 
mily of  the  human  race. 

What  inducements  to  pray,  Thy  kingdom  come\ 
Christians  awake  from  your  slumbers  and  survey  the  con- 
dition of  man.  Here  you  may  see  within  the  bounda- 
ries of  those  kingdoms  over  which  the  banner  of  the  cross 
waves  nominally  triumphant;  yea,  within  the  courts  of 
the  sanctuary,  and  around  the  altar,  millions,  your 
friends,  your  parents,  your  brethren,  your  children, 
alas!  millions,  with  eyes,  yet  they  see  not,  ears  yet  they 
hear  not,  and  with  hearts,  yet  they  do  not  understand 
the  power  of  the  blessed  Gospel.  Three- fourths  of  the 
earth's  population  are  Turks  and  Heathen.  Behold  the 
ways  to  Mecca  crowded  with  their  tens  of  thousands  of 
Mahometan  pilgrims,  who  infatuated  by  superstition  go  to 
appease  the  offended  Deity  by  presenting  their  emaci- 
ated bodies  in  devotion  at  the  shrine  of  the  false  pro- 
phet. 

Who  expose  aged  parents  on  the  banks  of  desert  rivers 
to  the  mercy  of  tygers  and  other  beasts  of  pray,  burn  the 
living  widow  with  the  body  of  her  dead  husband,  and 
roast  their  infant  children  in  excavated  ovens,  to  appease 
the  God  of  mercy  for  the  parents  crimes?  The  hea- 
then, the  most  numerous  class  of  this  world's  inhabitants. 
What  uttermost  continents  and  disiarit  isles  crowded 
with  the  habitations  of  heathenism!  What  armies  mutter- 
ing their  incantations,  performing  tlieir  senseless  witch- 
craft, or  to  obtain  the  imaginary  favour  of  some  lifeless 
idol,  pursuing  pilgrimages  in  which  the  hungry  vultures 
are  fed  with  their  flesh,  and  the  ways,  and  the  fields, 
strewed  with  their  naked  bones!  These  are  tie  heathen, 
the  inhabitants  of  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  and  of 
the  distant  isles.  But  for  .the  Saviour  it  is  written  in  the 
recordsof  heaven  audit  is  revealed  on  earth  TiieJteathe'n 
for  thine  inheritance  andtiieuiterwost  partsof  the  earth 
for  thy  possession,  and  the  isles  shall  icaii  for  thy  law. 


264 

Strange  it  indeed  appears,  and  strange  it  really  is,  but 
it  is  nevertheless  true,  O  Christians,  that  your  prayei^  are 
demanded  to  give  eyes  that  w  ill  see,  ears  that  will  hear,  and 
hearts  that  will  understand  to  the  millions  and  tens  of  mil- 
lions that  in  christian  lands  are  blind,  and  deaf,  and  unfee- 
ling to  all  that  in  the  Gospel  is  precious  and  saving:  to  dis- 
pel the  delusion  of  the  false  prophet;  to  convert  his  priests 
and  his  pilgrims  to  the  faith  of  the  Gospel  and  demolish 
his  temples;  to  break  the  chains  of  magic  and  the  power  of 
witchcraft,  to  save  the  deluded  devotee  from  the  sangui- 
nary worship  of  his  idol  and  from  the  self  immolation  of 
his  superstitious  pilgrimage;  the  aged  parent  from  fierce 
tygers  and  devouring  lions;  the  widow  from  the  funeral 
pile;  the  smiling  infant  from  the  burning  alter;  and  final- 
ly, a  world  from  eternal  woe.  Look  upwards!  Behold 
the  King  of  Kings  and  the  Lord  of  Lords  with  his  sword 
on  his  thigh,  and  his  armies  in  his  train,  ready  to  go 
forth  conquering  and  to  conquer!  See  the  King  stays  his 
chariot  and  his  millions  of  myriads  pause;  and  all  look 
down  upon  the  saints  on  earth.  Hark!  the  trumpet 
sounds,  To  the  help  of  the  Lord,  to  the  help  of  the  Lord, 
against  the  jnighty.  Arise,  Christians,  put  on  your 
armour;  God  awaits  for  your  co-operation;  and  the  world 
is  sinking  in  death.  Will  you  withhold  the  prayer, 
"Thy  k'mgdom  eome-^  when  God  spared  not  his  Son, 
and  Jesus  shed  his  blood? — Amen. 


THE  THRIS^IAN  PREArHEl^ 


Vol.  1.  3MY,  1828.  N^  12. 


SCRIPTURAL  PREACHING. 

If  any  man  speak,  let  him  speak  as  the  oracles  of  God. 

—1  Pet.  iv.  11. 

If  it  be  enjoined  on  all  men  to  take  heed  what  they 
hear,  surely  it  is  no  less  required  of  ministers  of  the 
Gospel  to  ponder  well  what  they  speak.  That  their  in- 
sructions  may  become  a  savour  of  life  unto  life;  that  they 
may  save  both  themselves  and  those  who  hear  them, 
they  must  speak,  not  after  the  wisdom  of  men,  nor  ac- 
cording to  philosophy  falsely  so  called;  but  according 
to  the  oracles  of  God.     Let  us  therefore  consider — 

I.  What  is  speaking  according  to  the  oracles  of  God; 
and 

II.  The  motives  enforcing  the  duty, 

I.  What  is  speaking  according  to  the  oracles  of  God? 
If  the  Scriptures  be  admitted  the  only  rule,  by  which 
the  Christian  minister  is  to  measure  the  length  and 
breadth,  the  height  and  depth  of  every  doctrine, 
which  he  delivers,  and  of  every  duty  which  he  incul- 
cates, it  is  obviously  a  dictate  of  reason,  that  these  ora- 
cles should  be  interpreted  in  their  most  natural,  and  so 
far  as  possible,  in  their  most  literal  sense.  The  licence 
too  often  taken  in  figurative  interpretation,  has  ever 
since  the  days  of  Origen,  been  the  bane  of  theology  and 
the  curse  of  the  church.  To  preach  truly  scripturally, 
is  to  proclaim  doctrines  arising  from  comparing  spiri- 
tural  things  with  spiritural,  so  as  to  give  the  most  op- 
posite texts  the  most  literal  interpretation  admitted  by 
the  comparison. 

The  eternity  of  Deity,  is  most  distinctly  recognized 
in  the  scriptures.  From  everlasting  to  everlasting  he 
is  God. 

So  also  his  immutability;  in  him  there  is  no  vaynahh" 
ness  neither  shadow  of  turning;  but  is  the  same  yester-- 
day,  to  day  and  forever. 


266 

In  the  language  of  his  inspiration,  he  reveals  his  own 
foreknowledge  to  be  eternal.  Known  unto  God  are 
all  his  works  from  the  beginning  of  the  ivorld. 

If  the  testimony  of  the  bible  be  admitted^  he  is  of 
purer  eyes  than  to  behold  iniquity/;  and  one  with  whom 
no  evil  can  dwell.  He  is  declared  by  the  heavenly 
hosts  to  be,  the  Holi/,  holy,  holy  Lord  God  Almighty. 

But  he  is  also  merciful  and  compassionate.  "The 
Lord  is  mercifuP  and  "full  of  compassion,^^  has  no 
pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  and  is  unwilling 
that  any  should  perish. 

The  Scriptures  represent  him  no  less  eternal  in  his 
purpose,  than  in  his  being.  They  declare,  that  he  has 
now  a  counsel  that  shall  stand,  and  a  pleasure  which  he 
will  perform.  And  if  so;  then  if  he  change  not,  that 
counsel,  and  that  pleasure,  must  be  as  eternal  as  his 
being.  This  is  taught  in  those  Scriptures,  which  ex- 
press the  eternity  of  his  design  in  choosing  men  to  ho- 
liness: '^According  as  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  that  we  should  be  holy  and 
without  blame  before  him  in  love."  ^^Whom  he  did  fore- 
know, he  also  did  predestinate,  to  be  conformed  to  the 
ima8:e  of  his  Son."  This  predestination  is  associated 
with  the  divine  foreknowledge,  which  has  just  been 
proved  to  be  eternal:  With  this,  the  divine  predestina- 
tion must  be  cr?- eternal:  otherwise  there  must  have  been 
a  period  in  duration,  in  which  he  did  ndt  predestinate 
those  whom  he  did  foreknow. 

Now  if  his  foreknowledge,  and  his  purpose,  be  both 
script' irally  eternal,  and  co- eternal  with  his  existence, 
thev  are  aiso  co- eternal  with  each  other.  And  neither 
can  be  to  the  other,  antecedent  or  consequent,  or  cause 
or  effect;  but  they  coincide,  as  the  co- eternal  operations 
of  the  infinite  mind.  This  is  an  obvioiis  conclusion 
from  the  oracles  of  God  as  the  premises.  He  is  now  a 
God  u  bo  has  neither  any  pleasure  in  wickedness,  nor  in 
the  death  of  the  wicked.  As  he  changes  not,  he  was 
ever  the  same.  Then  in  forming  his  eternal  system  of 
th^^  moral  universe,  he  so  constituted  it,  as  to  involve  in 
its  consequences,  the  least  possible  amount  of  sin  and 


267 

suffering;  and  evil  was  introduced,  neither  by  his  ap- 
probation, or  agency,  but  found  its  way  as  tl?e  certain, 
though  not  the  necessary  imperfection  of  one  of  the  very 
best  moral  systems. 

The  natural  liberty  or  moral  freedom  of  man  is  a 
doctrine  of  revelation.     God  tempteth  no  man  to  evil 
but  ^*every  man  is  tempted  when  he  is  drawn  away  of 
of  his  own  lust  and  enticed.^'     '•Lo!  this  only  have  I 
found,  that  God  hath  made  man  upright;  but  they  have 
sought  out  many  inventions.-'      Moral  freedom  implies 
a  surrender  of  the  creature  to  the  liberty  of  employing, 
in  acts  of  intelligence  and  choice,  his  faculties  of  under- 
standing and  will,  addressed  by  moral  motives,  but  un- 
influenced by  any  direct  agency  of  Omnipotence.     Man 
is  a  finite  being.     He  is  liable  to  misjudge  the  motives 
presented  to  influence  his  choosings.     An  error  in  jud- 
ging motives  immediately  produces  a  temptation  to  an 
error  in  choice;  and  hence,  natTiral  liberty  in  a  finite- 
being,  unconfirmed  by  moral  means,  implies  a  liability 
to  the  transgression  of  moral  law.     Our  first  parents, 
placed  in  Eden  and  addressed  by  the   prohibition,  0/ 
the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  ye  shall  not 
eatj  and  by  the  sanction,  in  the  day  thou  eatest  thereof, 
thou  shalt  surely  die,  were  left  at  liberty  to  exercise 
their   understanding  in  judging  the  prohibition,    and 
the  sanction,  and  their  power  of  volition,  in  performing 
the  choice,  which  their  understanding  might  dictate. 
Their  understanding  being  finite,  was  liable  to  be  de- 
ceived, and  to  accredit  the  serpent  and  to  discredit  the 
sovereign  mandates  of  their  Maker.     The  consequence 
was,  they  believed  the  Tempter.     This  error  in  judg- 
ment prepared  their  minds  for  the  fatal  choice,  'SYhich 
brought  death  into  our  world  and  all  our  woe.''     Had 
the  Moral  Governor  restrained  their  judgment  and  voli- 
tion by  any  supernatural  means,  he  would  have  destroy- 
ed their  moral  being.     Moral  agency  consists  essential- 
ly in  liberty.     And  to  have  elevated  them  above  all 
liability  to  be  deceived  in  judgment  and  to  err  in  choice, 
he  must  be  conceived  to  have  imparted  to  them  his  own 
omniscience.     An  absurdity  as  monstrous^  as  to  suppose 


268 

the  creation  of  another  God.  Yet  nothing  less  could 
have  placed  them  above  exposure  to  temptation  and 
error.  The  introduction  of  sin  is  therefore,  most  ob- 
viously an  imperfection,  against  v^hich  no  system  of  go- 
vernment, however  wise,  could  possibly  secure  an  uni- 
verse composed  of  finite  moral  beings. 

It  is  no  objection,  that  some  such  beings  are  ultimate- 
ly confirmed.  They  are  confirmed  by  witnessing  the 
penalties  of  transgression  endured  by  the  disobedient. 
But  under  the  view  of  our  first  parents  in  Paradise,  no 
such  penalties  could  have  been  executed.  As  yet  no 
visible  beings,  whose  sufferings  only,  could,  with  bodily 
eyes,  be  surveyed,  had  sinned  and  become  subject  to  pe- 
nal sufferings. 

If  then  it  be  scripturally  ti-ue,  that  no  plan  of  creation 
and  government,  however  good  and  wise,  could  have 
secured  to  an  universe  of  finite  moral  beings,  the  very 
essence  of  whose  nature  consists  in  liberty,  an  entire 
exemption  from  all  liability  to  transgression;  if  God's  ha- 
tred to  sin  and  his  foreknowledge  of  all  beings  and 
events,  l)e  co-eternal  with  his  adoption  of  the  present 
system  of  creation  and  providence;  and  if  he  be  sup- 
posed ever  to  plan  and  act.  consistently  with  his  own 
perfections,  then,  notwithstanding  the  existence  of  evil, 
the  most  simple  conclusion  from  these  obviously  scrip- 
tural truths  is,  that  in  the  exercise  of  the  most  perfect 
omniscience,  and  the  most  uncompromising  opposition 
to  sin,  he  projected  the  mighty  plan  of  accountable 
creation.  And  then,  if  it  be  true,  that  in  wisdom  he 
performed  all  his  works,  the  design  must  have  been 
conceived  in  reference  to  consequences  the  most  remote, 
as  well  as  the  more  immediate;  and  then  also,  if  \vc  ad- 
mit, that  the  Holy  One  regarded  his  own  holiness,  his 
eternal  projection  of  moral  nature,  as  well  as  his  own 
perfections,  must,  in  the  last  degree,  be  opposed  to 
evil.  Thus  the  result  of  the  whole  is,  the  divine  ora- 
cles sustain  the  conclusion,  that  the  frame  of  moral  be- 
ing eternally  formed  in  the  infinite  mind,  and  now  in 
the  progress  of  fulfilment,  involves  the  least  possible  ag- 
gregate of  evil,  and  the  sum  that  actually  obtains,  results 


269 

not  necessarily,  but  morally  from  its  imperfections  as  a 
creature. 

But  if  sin  and  suffering  be  the  certain  imperfection 
of  a  moral  creation,  the  question  will  naturally  occur, 
why  did  an  infinitely  perfect  being,  all  the  attributes  of 
whose  nature  are  opposed  to  evil,  originate  such  a  sys- 
tem? An  answer  to  this  enquiry  is  evidently  deducible 
from  those  scriptures,  which  reveal  the  goodness  of 
Deity.  It  must  be  visible  to  every  beholder,  that  not 
withstanding  all  the  deductions  from  the  general  happi- 
ness, made  by  the  wickedness  and  misery  which  we  wit- 
ness in  the  world,  there  is  still  such  a  balance  of  happi 
ness,  that  more  good  is  produced  than  could  be,  if  no 
such  world  existed.  Now  if  another  world  could  not 
have  been  created  in  which  there  would  have  been  less 
evil,  then  the  choice  of  Deity  as  an  infinitely  good  being, 
could  not  have  been  between  this  and  a  better;  but  be- 
tween  this  and  a  worse,  or  between  this  and  none.  The 
supposition,  that  he  preferred  this  to  a  worse,  is  an  ob- 
vious acknowledgment  of  his  goodness  in  the  choice 
which  he  has  made.  And  if  so  much  happiness  could 
not  be  enjoyed  had  no  world  been  created;  and  if  the 
proper  object  of  goodness  be  the  production  of  happiness, 
then  Infinite  goodness  would  require  the  creation  of  this 
world,  attended  with  all  its  concomitant  evils,  in  pre- 
ference to  none;  just  as  a  mortal  might  prefer  a  life  in 
the  general  happy,  but  variegated  with  infelicitous 
events,  to  absolute  annihilation. 

The  universal  depravity  of  mankind  is  a  doctrine  of 
the  divine  oracles:  ^"As  by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
world,  and  death  by  sin,  and  so  death  hath  passed  upon 
all  men,  for  that  all  have  sinned.'^  ^"In  Adam  all  die.'' 
^^The  wages  of  sin  is  death.''  ^^All  have  sinned  and 
come  short  of  the  glory  of  God." 

In  connexion  with  this  humiliating  truth,  the  preach- 
er influenced  by  the  spirit  of  the  Bible,  will  speak  to 
his  hearers  of  the  danger  which  follows  closely  in  its 
train.  In  tones  as  loud  and  shrill  as  the  sound  of  a  trum- 
pet, he  will  proclaim,  "The  wicked  shall  he  turned 
into  hell  and  all  the  nations  that  forget  GodP 


270 

But  whilst  he  convinces  men  of  their  sin,  and  warns 
ihem  of  their  danger,  he  will  also  praclaim  the  riches  of 
that  mercy,  which  has  provided,  and  now  oiTers,  the 
means  of  recovery.  By  the  living  oracles  he  is  warran- 
ted to  say,  that  if  God  have  concluded  all  in  unbelief, 
it  is  that  he  may  have  mercy  upon  all:  "Yov  God  so  loved 
the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  upon  him  should  not  perish  but 
have  everlasting  life." 

The  work  of  salvation  executed  in  time  is  but  the 
fulfilment  of  the  system  of  mercy  planned  in  the  highest 
eternity.  According  to  the  scriptures  the  death  of 
Clirist,  appears  to  be  contemplated  in  the  system  as  a 
ransom  for  all;  and  a  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world,  A  ransom  is  literally  the  price  of  redemp- 
tion, intended  or  offered  for  the  liberation  of  captives 
which  may  or  may  not  be  accepted  for  the  purpose  for 
whicn  it  is  intended  or  offered:  To  propitiate  signi- 
fies to  appease.  A  propitiation  is  that  whicli  appeases. 
The  death  of  Christ,  has  so  far  appeased  divine  justice, 
that  God  now  sustains  the  whole  world  under  a  dispensa- 
tion of  mercy. 

So  also  in  the  same  eternal  plan,  his  death  appears  to 
be  contemplated,  as  it  proves  to  be  in  fact,  an  atone- 
ment, and  redemption,  to  all  such,  and  none  but  such, 
as  believe.  Atonement  literally  signifies  setting  at  one 
such  as  were  at  variance.  It  is  a  reconciliation  between 
contending  parties.  Redemption  means  the  liheration 
of  a  captive  by  a  price.  The  sinner  who  believes  is 
set  at  one  with  his  Maker.  God  and  he  arc  reconciled. 
When  he  believes,  he  is  also  redeemed.,  liberated  by  the 
price  of  the  Saviour's  su.^'erings  from  the  captivity  by 
which  he  was  held  a  prisoner  to  jiistice.  The  language 
of  revelation  is:  "By  whom  WE"  (christians)  "have  now 
received  the  atonement."  "Forasmuch  as  ye  know  that 
ye"  (elect  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the 
Father)  "'were  not  redeemed  with  corruptible  things 
as  silver  and  gold  from  your  vain  conversation — but  such 
with  the  precious  blood  of  Christ," 

Thus  it  is  Scriptural  to  teach,  that  the  death  of 
Christ  was  in  eternity  designed  and  is  in  time  made  m 


271 

effect^  a  ransom  and  a  propitiation  for  all  men  and  a.- 
tonement  and  redemption  to  those  who  believe. 

The  death  of  Christ,  already  a  ransom  and  a  propitia- 
tion for  all,  is  freely  and  sincerely  offered  to  those  who 
come  to  God  to  be  made  Atonement  and  Redemption  to 
them  when  they  believe.  And  as  they  are  dead  in  tres- 
passes and  in  sins,  and  thus  morally  disqualified  for  ex- 
ercising scriptural  faith,  he  also  offers  his  Spirit  to  re- 
new by  the  infusion  of  spiritual  vitality,  all  those,  that 
will  come  to  him,  that  they  may  have  life.  Thus  God 
calls  upon  all  men  to  come,  and  promises  to  those  who 
obey  his  call,  his  Spirit  to  perform  in  them,  the  work 
of  regeneration  enabling  them  to  believe;  and  the  obe- 
dience of  the  Saviour,  to  be  made  to  them  atonement 
and  redemption,  when  they  do  believe.  When  the  sin- 
ner believes,  God  and  he,  once  at  variance,  are  set  at 
one;  for  we  have  peace  with  God  when  justified  by  faith: 
When  by  faith  we  can  overcome  the  world  we  partake  of 
redemption;  for  when  saved  from  our  vain  conversation 
we  are  redeemed  by  the  precious  blood  of  Christ.  Thus 
the  blood  of  Christ  designed  from  eternity  to  become, 
to  all  such  as  were  foreseen  as  coming  to  Christ,  atone- 
ment and  redemption,  is  made  such  by  an  actual  appro- 
priation when  they  become  believers. 

As  in  the  exercise  of  moral  freedom,  man  lost  his  ori- 
ginal conformity  to  his  Maker's  image,  so  also  in  the 
economy  of  salvation,  through  the  use  of  this  same  free- 
dom, this  conformity  is  restored.  It  is  left  as  mucli  to 
his  choice  now  whether  to  receive  that  renewinp-  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  which  enables  him  to  believe,  and  whether 
to  make  the  Saviour's  obedience,  an  atonement  and  re- 
demption to  him,  as  it  was  to  the  choice  of  the  first 
man,  whether  he  would  eat  the  forbidden  fruit.  On 
the  ground  of  the  ransom,  paid  in  the  Saviour's  suffer- 
ings, and  the  propitiation  effected  by  the  sliedding  of 
his  blood,  God  furnishes  guilty  and  ruined  men  with 
the  means  of  coming  to  Christ  to  receive  from  the  Holy 
Ghost  that  spiritual  life,  which  enables  them  to  believe. 
He  addresses  them  even  while  in  their  natural  state  as 
intelligent  and  voluntary  beings.     By  his  word  provi-^ 


272 

vidence  and  Spirit  he  proclaims  to  them  their  guilt, 
and  warns  them  of  their  danger,  informs  them  of  their 
helplessness,  invites  them  to  come  to  the  Redeemer,  and 
promises  spirit-ial  and  eternal  life  to  every  one  who 
comes.  It  is  no  more  at  the  option  of  an  unrenewed 
man,  whether  he  will  walk  to  a  house  of  worship  and 
hear  a  discourse  pronounced,  than  whether  he  will  come 
to  Christ  and  obtain  the  regenerating  operations  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  It  is  no  more  at  man's  choice,  whe- 
ther he  will  eat  when  he  is  pained  with  hunger,  or  drink 
when  he  is  parched  with  thirst,  than  when  convinced 
of  his  sin  and  alarmed  at  his  danger,  he  will  come  to 
Christ  to  ask  the  spiritual  life,  which  enables  him  to  be- 
lieve; and  that  atonement  and  redemption,  which  be- 
come his  as  a  consequence  of  believing. 

And  it  is  not  only  optionary  with  man  whether  he 
will,  when  convicted  and  alarmed,  seek  the  grace  of 
God  which  bringeth  salvation;  but  also,  whether  he  will 
em])loy  the  means,  by  which  as  an  unawakened  and  un- 
renewed man,   he  may  become  awakened  and  renewed. 
Whether  he  will  attend  to  the  dispensations  of  Provi 
dence,  the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures,  and  to  the  con- 
victions which  often  flash  upon  his  conscience,  making 
also  the  awful  truths  which  they  communicate  the  sub 
jects  of  his  daily  and  his  nightly  meditations,  and  whe 
ther  he  will  cherish   the  feelings  of  guilt  and  terror 
which  they  awaken,  is  as  much  at  his  option,  as  whether 
he  will  choose  the  course  which  leads  to  wealth  and 
honor,  or  any  other  earthly  object. 

And  stronger  assurances  of  success  attend  the  use 
of  the  means  of  salvation,  than  can  possibly  accompa- 
ny the  employment  of  means  for  any  earthly  pur- 
pose. If  God  have  constituted  a  connexion  between 
the  preferences  of  the  man  who  chooses  to  plough  and 
sow,  and  liis  obtaining  the  fruits  of  the  harvest,  yet  he 
has  no  where  promised  the  husbandman,  that  the  seed, 
which  he  sows,  shall  certainly  be  productive.  But  he 
has  promised  that  they  who  seek  him  shall  find  him, 
and  that  whosoever  asks  shall  receive.  The  Saviour  as- 
signs as  the  only  reason  of  man's  ruin  that  men  will  not 
come  unto  him  that  they  might  have  life. 


273 

But  whilst  the  Book  of  God  so  clearly  teaches,  that 
the  sinner  who  chooses  to  attend  to  the  means  of  grace, 
and  immediately  to  find  grace  in  using  them,  shall  ne- 
ver be  disappointed,  it  also  distinctly  instructs  us, 
that  no  exertion  of  his,  restores  divine  life  to  the  soul: 
For  ivho  maketh  thee  to  differ  from  another?  Jlndwhat 
hast  thou  that  thou  didst  not  receive?  now  if  thou 
didst  receive  it,  why  dost  thou  glory  as  if  thou  hadst 
not  received  it?  The  sons  of  God  are  horn,  not  of  blood 
nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man  but 
of  God.  As  the  ploughing,  sowing,  or  watering  of  the 
husbandman,  can  not  of  itself,  shoot  the  blade  or  mature 
the  harvest,  so  the  meditations,  tears,  and  prayers  of  the 
transgressor,  can  not  restore  divine  life  to  the  soul. — 
But  as  the  Author  of  goodness  follows  the  work  of  the 
husbandman  with  that  operation  of  Omnipotence,  which 
nourishes  and  creates  the  grain,  so  also  he  succeeds  the 
seeking  of  the  sinner,  physically  and  morally  unable  to 
enkindle  in  himself  the  least  dawning,  or  awake  in  him- 
self the  least  moving  of  spiritual  life,  with  that  trans- 
forming act,  by  which  he  that  was  dead  in  trespasses  and 
sins,  becomes  quickened  and  raised  from  the  grave  of 
moral  depravity. 

As  God  eternally  determined;,  that  Christ's  blood  should 
be  atonement  and  redemption,  to  all  who  believe;  and 
that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  renew  every  sinner  co-eter- 
nally  foreknown  as  coming  to  Christ  so  as  to  qualify 
him  for  believing;  and  as  he  declares,  that  he  is  not 
willing  that  any  should  perish;  but  that  all  should  come 
to  repentance,  so  it  is  an  obvious  inference,  that  would 
any  more  come  to  Christ,  their  coming  would  have  been 
eternally  foreknown,  and  co-eternally  with  this  fore- 
knowledge God  would  have  decreed  that  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit  should  reinstate  in  them  the  life,  which  they  lost  by 
the  fall;  and  that  the  Saviour's  blood  should  become 
atonement  and  redemption  to  them. 

And  hence  if  any  are  passed  over,  in  the  eternal  elec- 
tion by  which  God's  people  are  chosen  before  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world,  and  by  which  Christ's  death  be- 
comes appropriated  to  them  for  the  purposes  of  recon- 

35 


274 

ciliation  and  redemption,  it  is,  because  they  will  not 
choose  to  come,  and  therefore,  could  not  be  eternally 
foreknown  as  the  objects  on  whom  God  could  consist- 
ently with  all  his  perfections,  eternally  determine  to  be- 
stow the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  blood  of 
the  covenant  for  redemption  and  reconciliation.  If 
therefore,  they  are  not  elected,  and  Christ's  blood  was 
never  designed  for  them  as  a  redeeming  and  atoning  sa- 
crifice, it  is  because,  they  were  eternally  known  as  in 
time  refusing  to  come  to  receive  that  life  which  the 
Spirit  offers  to  all  that  come  to  Christ;  and  because,  God 
could  not  as  a  perfect  being,  determine  that  which 
would  contradict  all  his  perfections,  to  perform. 

He  who  speaks  as  the  oracles  of  God,  will  urge  unre- 
newed men  to  come  immediately  to  Christ,  and  hninedi- 
ately  to  believe,  and  repent.^  Every  exhibition  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine,  which  he  makes  from  the  sacred  desk,  he 
will  accompany  with  the  scriptural,  and  practical  truth: 
Behold,  710W  is  the  accepted  time;  behold  now  is  the  day 
of  salvation. 

And  finally,  he  will  teach,  that  every  moment,  spent 
in  neglecting  faith  and  repentance,  accumulates  guilt. 
If  on  coming  to  Christ,  the  Holy  Spirit  be  offered*  in 
all  his  Omnipotent  agency,  to  qualify  the  unregenerate, 
by  renewing  them  to  spirit'ial  life,  for  scripturally  belie- 
ving and  repenting:  and  if  on  their  believing,  and  re- 
penting, Christ  be  offered.!  to  be  actually  appropriated 
to  them,  as  atonement  and  redemption,  no  man  is  excu- 
sable for  living  even  the  shortest  time  without  a  new 
heart;  without  faith  and  repentance;  and  without  an 
actual  application  of  the  Saviour  for  all  the  piirposes  of  a- 
tonement  and  redemption.  If  any  arc  spiritually  dead, 
it  is  because,  they  will  not  come  to  Christ,  that  they  may 
have  life. 

Thus  on  the  plea  of  neglecting  the  great  salvation, 
every  mouth  must  be  stopped,  and  all  the  ivorld  become 
guilty  before  God, 

II.    The  motives  enforcins;  the  duties  of  speaking  ac 
cording  to  the  oracles  of  God,  are  to  be  exhibited. 

•See  No.  2,  p.  4r.    Nos  2  and  3.        :JNo.  4. 


275 

1 .    The  philosofMcal  difficulties  mid  scriptural  con^ 
tradictionsy   incorporated  in  both  the  Calvinian,  and 
Arminian  systems  of  metaphysical  theology,  are   by 
preaching  scriptur ally,  ivholly  avoided. 

The  divine  purpose,  when  admitted  by  the  Armini- 
an  in  any  form,  amounts  merely  to  this:  That  God  as  a 
consequence  of  foreknowing  the  future  choice  of  his 
accountable  creatures,  predetermined  the  particular  e- 
vents  of  his  moral,  government — that  foreknowing  the 
fall  of  man,  he  determined  to  send  his  Son  to  save  the 
w  hole  human  kind.  But  foreseeing  that  all  would  not 
believe,  he  determined  to  save  those  only?  who  he  fore- 
saw would;  and  to  condemn  the  others  to  endless  ruin. 
On  this  hypothesis,  foreknowledge  is  the  foundation  of 
the  divine  purposes  and  is  anterior  to  them,  both  in  the 
order  of  nature,  and  of  duration. 

This  philosophical  theory  contradicts  all  our  experi- 
ence in  the  operations  of  our  own  minds,  and  finds  no 
sanction  in  the  Bible.  Although,  it  be  admitted,  that 
we  may  foreknow  events,  produced  by  causes,  entirely 
unconnected  with  our  agency,  as  mere  objects  of  know- 
ledge, without  making  them  any  part  of  our  system  of 
calculations;  yet,  all  our  experience  denies,  that  we  can 
foreknow  events  as  certainly  to  be  produced  by  our- 
selves, without  also,  determining,  that  we  wall  certainly 
make  them  the  subjects  of  our  agency.  A  man  may  in- 
deed foreknow,  that  an  assembly  will  meet  on  a  certain 
day,  to  hear  a  public  speech:  and  yet  give  the  fore- 
known occurrence  no  place  in  his  plans;  but  he  cannot 
foreknow^  that  he  will  certainly  be  a  member  of  that 
meeting,  without  also  determining  certainly  to  become 
such.  And  so,  although  Deity  might  be  supposed  to 
foreknow  the  events,  produced  by  causes,  entirely  un- 
connected wdth  the  consequences  of  his  own  agency,  if 
such  events  were  morally  possible;  yet,  when  we  revert 
to  the  truth,  that  every  cause  producing  mora!  events, 
is  itself,  either  mediately,  or  immediately,  the  effect  of 
his  own  power,  and,  that  with  every  one  of  these  Events, 
he  foreknows  some  one  or  more  of  his  own  acts  to  corres- 
pond, we  feel,  that  to  suppose  them  not  to  make  a  part 


276 

of  his  plan^  would  contradict  all  that  we  experience  in 
the  operations  of  onr  own  minds.  Could  we  imagine  a 
world  to  exist  some  where  beyond  the  limits  of  infinite 
space,  and  beyond  the  reach  of  Omnipresence^  uncaused 
by  the  divine  Omnipotence,  and  uncontrouled  by  the 
divine  providence,  then  we  might  also  conceive  the  sins 
and  sufferings  of  its  inhabitants  to  be  foreknown  by 
Deity  assubjects  of  mere  speculation,  without  hisdecree- 
ing  either  to  prevent,  or  to  permit  them;  but  when  we 
are  informed,  that  God  made  the  world,  with  every  ac- 
countable being  which  treads  its  surface,  and  breathes 
its  air;  and,  that  with  every  moral  act  of  the  creature, 
he  eternally  foreknows  some  future  act  of  his  own  to 
correspond — that  for  every  sin  he  will  inflict  a  penalty, 
and  that  for  every  act  of  rigliteousness  he  will  render  a 
reward — to  suppose  then,  that  he  exercises  a  mere  neu- 
tral prescience,  is  to  relinquish  in  our  credence  all  the 
experience,  furnished  by  the  laws  of  our  own  constitu- 
tions. 

Also  this  Arminian  hypothesis,  by  inevitable  conse- 
quence, inverts  the  relations  between  the  Creator  and 
his  creatures;  and  denies  the  immutability  of  him  who 
changes  not.  It  supposes  the  unchangeable  Jehovah  to 
reverse  his  designs,  and  revoke  his  cotmsels  as  frequently 
as  his  erring  creatures  choose  to  violate  his  laws,  or  ne- 
glect his  mercies.  The  tenor  of  this  metaphysical  creed 
runs  thus:  God  determined  when  he  made  man,  that  he 
sho:ild  be  haj)py.  But  no  sooner  was  this  creature 
viewed  in  prospect  as  made,  than  the  whole  design  was 
beheld  as  broken!  Man  was  foreknown  as  fallen.  As  a 
consequence  of  this  foreknowledge,  the  disappointed 
Deity  resolved  to  send  his  Son  into  the  world  to  save 
the  whole  human  race.  But  here  again  his  purpose  was 
defeated!  Some  were  foreseen  as  not  accepting  his  mer- 
cies. Again  the  disconcerted  Jehovah  amends  his  plan, 
by  determining  as  a  consequence  of  their  foreknown 
neglect  of  his  mercy,  to  destroy  them  and  to  save  those 
only  vvliom  he  foresaw,  as  certainly,  to  give  an  obedient 
credence  to  the  Gospel.     Thus,  this  doctrine  elevates 


277 

the  creature  to  the  throne^  and  degrades  the  Creator  to 
the  footstool. 

This  peculiarity  of  Arminianism^  also  contradicts  all 
our  ideas  of  the  wisdom  of  Deity. 

If  when  the  Creator  made  man,  he  acted  in  reference 
to  no  plan,  it  is  difficult  to  discover  any  wisdom  in  the 
end  for  which  he  created  this  part  of  his  works.  To 
create  a  being,  without  designing  any  end  for  his  exis- 
tence, is  to  act  without  meaning,  and  is  obviously  un- 
wise; and  to  create  him  with  a  design  foreknown  to  be 
afterwards  frustrated,  as  this  tenet  supposes,  is  scarcely 
any  less  devoid  of  wisdom.  If  then  this  doctrine  be 
advocated,  the  Bible,  which  teaches,  that  in  ivisdom 
God  made  ail  Ms  ivorAs,  is  in  part  denied,  unless  indeed 
it  be  proved,  as  we  verily  believe  it  can  never  be,  that 
it  is  ivise  in  God,  not  to  exercise  his  wisdom. 

Besides,    it  inferentially  charges  God  with  the  au- 
thorship of  sin;  and  therefore,  denies  his  goodness. — 
Arminianism  under  its  different   modifications,  some- 
times   supposes,    that   God   eternally    foreknew,    and 
at  other  times,  that  he  did  not  eternally  foreknow,  all 
the  conseqiiences  of  creating  the  moral  universe  in  the 
manner  in  which  he  actually  did  create  it.     But  it  al- 
ways appears  to  acknowledge,  that,  had  he  so  chosen, 
he  MIGHT  have  foreknown  every  event;  and  might  have 
constituted  the  moral  universe  so  difterentiy,  as  for  ever 
to  have  excluded  the  introduction  of  sin  and  misery. — 
According  to  this  theory,  God  must  have  been  so  reck- 
less of  the  well  being  of  his  entelligent  creation,  as  ei- 
ther not  to  select  a  system  in  which  there  might  be  less 
sin  and  suffering,  than  he  foreknew  would  certainly  pre- 
vail,  and  which  has  prevailed  in  the   planless  fabric 
which  he  has  selected;  or,  as  to  be  unwilling  to  fore- 
know, when  he  might,  what  would  be  the  certain  result 
of  introducing  moral   beings  into  his  universe.      This 
when  divested  of  all  circumlocution  and  ambiguity,  is 
just  saying,  that  the  wise,  merciful,   and  compassionate 
Jehovah  chose  to  create  moral  beings,  capable  of  obey- 
ing his  laws,  and  becoming  eternally  happy,  or,  of  dis- 


278 

obeying  his  laws,  and  becoming  eternally  miserable;  but 
was  so  regardless  of  their  weal  or  woe,  as  not  to  adopt 
even  a  plan  to  secure  their  obedience  and  bliss,  or,  as 
not  even  to  be  willing  to  foreknow,  whether  they  would 
by  obedience  secure  eternal  happiness,  or  by  disobedi- 
ence, sink  themselves  into  everlasting  destruction!!!  If 
then  to  adopt  a  system — it  matters  not,  whether  a  sys- 
tem of  order  or  confusion — a  system  which  produces  sin, 
when  another  might  have  been  chosen  with  all  the  good, 
and  without  any  of  the  evil,  constitutes  an  agent  the 
author  of  evil,  then  the  unavoidable  consequence  of 
Arminianism,  is  that  God  is  the  author  of  sin!!  It  can 
be  legitimately  argued,  that  he  must  delight  in  sin  and 
suffering:  or  how  could  he  have  been  so  heedless  of  se- 
curing the  obedience  and  the  happiness  of  his  moral 
subjects,  as  to  be  unwilling  to  foreknow  the  events  of 
their  existence;  and  as  to  devise  no  plan  for  uninter- 
ruptedly perpetuating  their  well  being? 

If  this  inference  be  just,  the  Arminian  most  unappo- 
sitely  appropriates,  to  his  service,  the  texts  of  scripture 
which  declare,  that  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of 
the  wicked^  and,  that  ^xn  is  the  abominable  thing  which 
he  hates.  The  Scriptures  whose  authority  he  makes 
the  chief  corner-stone  of  his  temple,  are  the  very  ones, 
which  rase  its  deepest  foundations.  Such  are  the  con- 
tradictions with  which  this  first  principle  of  philoso- 
y)hical  Arminianism,  confronts  both  reason  and  revela- 
tion. But,  whilst  this  philosophy  falsely  so  called ^  con- 
tradicts our  reason  as  well  as  the  Bible,  by  inferentially 
teaching  us,  that  God  eternally  foreknew  all  the  events 
of  his  own  universe  with  a  meaningless  survey^  that  he 
in  whom  tliere  is  no  variableness  nor  the  least  shadow 
of  turnings  changes  with  all  the  capricious  choosings 
of  his  creatures,  and  is  thus  governed  by  their  will;  that 
he  created  the  universe,  not  in  wisdom,  or  else  it  is  wis- 
dom to  create  it  without  a  plan;  and  above  all,  that  he  is 
the  author  of  sin  and  misery;  he  who  speaks  as  the  ora- 
cles of  God,  will  avoid  all  these  horrid  tenets.  He  will 
spiy:  God's  foreknowledge  and  determinations  are  co~ 


279 

eternal,^  and  therefore,  he  never  surveyed  a  single  event 
without  perfect  meaning.  All  his  own  doings,  and  all 
the  doings  of  his  moral  subjects,  with  which  his  own 
correspond,  are  the  parts  of  his  plan,t  which  he  freely 
elected  in  eternity,  and  therefore,  himself,  and  not  his 
creatures,  must  be  the  Supreme  Governor.  When  in 
his  eternal  mind,  he  adopted  this  plan  of  the  universe, 
he  had  before  him  all  possibilities,  and  out  of  these,  he 
selected,  without  any  beginning  and  succession  in  his 
mental  operations,  the  very  bestX  possible  plan;  and 
therefore,  in  wisdom  he  made  all  his  tvorks.  And  fi- 
nally, he  has  chosen  one  of  those  possible  systems  of  mo- 
ral existences,  which  involve  more  moral  good,  and  less 
moral  evil,§  than  any  others,  that  could  have  been  cho- 
sen. And  thus  having  employed  the  very  best  means 
to  produce  the  greatest  moral  good,  and  the  least  moral 
evil,  God  can  not  be  the  author  of  sin.  He  hates  it  as 
an  abomina])le  thing;  and  as  he  lives,  he  has  no  pleasure 
in  the  death  of  the  ivicked. 

Again  Arninianism  teaches,  that  election  signifies. 
either  selecting  men  to  eternal  life,  after  they  have  lived 
and  died  in  the  faith,  or  simply  making  them  members 
of  the  visible  church.  \\  Both  these  definitions  are  per- 
fectly gratuitous.  They  find  no  support,  or  even  coun- 
tenance, in  the  w  ritten  word  of  God;  but  appear  to  be 
carved  out  by  the  necessities  of  a  system,  already  showqi 
to  be  in  other  respects  antiscriptural,  as  the  doubtful 
alternatives  of  a  laboured  interpretation.  This  theory 
of  theological  philosophy,  instructs  us,  that  he  hath  cho- 
sen [elected]  us  in  him  during  the  Jewish  state  before 
the  Gospel  zvas  preached,^^  that  we  should  become 
members  of  the  visible  church,  or,  that  if  we  believe, 
persevere,  and  die  in  the  faith,  we  should  be  partakers 
of  the  heavenly  bliss;  but  the  book  of  God  teaches  us, 
that  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world,  that  (without  any  peradventure  expressed  or 
doubt  suggested)  we  should  be  holy,  and  without  blame 

*SeeNo,l,p   8.  jNo.  1,  p   II.  :fNo.  1,  p    16,  and  No.  8  and  ? 

throughout.  §No.  1,  16,  23,  also  No,  4,  p.  91,  and  Nos.7,  8,9,  throughout. 
IjNo.  10,  note.      *»No,  5,  p.  120. 


280 

befoi*e  him  in  love.  And  as  such  chosen  persons  are 
elsewhere  said  to  be  elect  (already  elected)  according 
to  the  foreknowleds^e  of  God  the  Father  through  sancti- 
f  cation  of  the  Spirit  unto  obedience,  and  the  sprink- 
ling of  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  it  is  legitimate  reason- 
ing to  infer,  that  they  were  chosen  to  be,  even  in  this 
life,  holy  and  without  blame  before  God  in  love.^  Thus 
he  who  speaks  as  an  Arminian,  teaches  a  doctrine,  not 
only  not  supported  by  the  Bible,  but  even  contradicted 
by  its  most  literal  testimony;  but  he  who  speaks  as  the 
oracles  of  God,  will  say,  that  co- eternally,  and  in  coin- 
dence,  with  the  foreknowledge  of  those,  who  would  be 
influenced  by  the  common  means  of  grace,  to  come  to 
the  Saviour,  in  eternity  Deity  chose  such  in  design, 
and  in  time  chooses  them  in  efftctj  by  the  renewijig  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  that  they  should  be  holy  and  ivithout 
blame  before  him  in  love;  and  that  all  true  christians  are 
ELECT  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the 
Father — ELECTED  through  sanctification  of  the  Spi- 
rit unto  obedience  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ. 

Besides,  Arminianism  supposes,  that  in  the  change 
by  which  a  man  is  translated  from  death  unto  life,  and 
in  which,  old  things  pass  away  and  all  things  become 
new,  the  creature  operates  with  the  Creator.f  But  this 
idea  is  utterly  irreconcileable  with  facts,  taught  by  su- 
preme authority:  ^^For  who  maketh  thee  to  differ  from 
another?''  ^^And  what  hast  thou  that  thou  didst  not  re- 
ceive?'' ^^Now  if  thou  didst  receive  it,  why  dost  thou 
glory  as  if  thou  hadst  not  received  it?"  ^^It  is  not  of  him 
that  willeth,  or  of  him  that  runneth;  but  of  God  that 
showeth  mercy."  *^The  sons  of  God  are  born,  not  of  blood, 
nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of 
God."  "\X,  is  God  that  worketh  in  you,  both  to  will  and 
to  do  of  his  good  ])leasure,"  ^^You  hath  he  quickened 
who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins."  ^^A  new  heart 
also,  will  I  giv  e  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within 
you." 


•See  No.  10,  242,  kc.        fSee  Nos.  2,  3  and  4.     Sec  No.  2,  p.  43.     No. 
10.  p.  2.'?6. 


281 

The  Arminian  arrogates  to  himself  a  co-operation  in  that 
holy  work,  the  honor  of  which,  the  Spirit  claims  as  ex- 
clusively his  own,  because  texts  are  found,  which  say  to 
the  sinner:  Wor^k  out  your  own  salvation;  a?^ise  from  the 
dead;  flee  from  the  wrath  to  tome;  make  you  a  new  heart 
ayid  a  new  spirit.  His  is  wholly  a  doctrine  of  inference. 
Man  isexhorted  to  malce  him  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit. 
The  Arminian  therefore  infers,  that  the  creature  assists 
the  Creator  in  this  operation.  But  this  inference  is  flatly 
opposed  to  the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost  when  he  says: 
*B.  new  heart  also  will  /GIVE  you;  and  a  new  spirit 
ivill  IPVT  within  you.     How  can  man  co-operate  in 
the  production  of  what  God  GIVES,  and  in  the  creation 
of  what  he  PUTS  within  him?  How  can  he  co-operate 
in  the  change  by  which  he  becomes  a  new  creature,  if 
it  be  performed  iiotofthe  WILL  of  the  flesh  nor  of  the 
WILL  of  7nan,  but  of  God?  Especially  when  he  no 
more  understands  the  mysterious  mode  of  the  Spirit^s 
operations,  than  he  does  the  invisible  movements  of  the 
wind?  If  these  two  classes  of  texts  be  understood  to  re- 
late to  precisely  the  same  thing,  they  obviously  conira- 
dict  each  other.      This  mode  of  interpretation  has  oc- 
casioned much  strife  about  words. 

But  he,  who  teaches  as  the  oracles  of  God,  will  avoid 
these  strifes,  and  contradictions,  by  teaching,  that  the 
texts  which  require  men  to  make  to  themselves  new 
hearts,  and  new  spirits,  are  simply  exhortations  to  meet 
God  in  the  way  of  his  own  appointment,  that  consistent- 
ly with  the  divine  perfections,  and  with  the  economy  of 
the  dispensation  of  grace,  the  Spirit  may  GIVE  them,  a 
new  heart,  and  PUT  w  ithin  them,  a  new  spirit.  Men  may 
be  said  to  make  to  themselves  a  new^  heart  and  a  new  spi- 
rit, when  they  pursue  the  method,  which  in  the  plan  of 
the  divine  mercy,  God  will  assuredly  follow  with  a  new 
heart,  and  with  a  new  spirit,  just  as  they  are  said  to  accu- 
mulate wealth,  when  they  pursue  the  course,  which  God 
is  pleased  to  crown  with  success.*     Parents  are  said  to 

*See  No.  2,  p.  45. 

36 


rear  a  family,  when  they  feed,  clothe,  and  protect  their 
childi'en,  and  yet,  it  is  not  in  their  power  to  add  a  cubit 
to  the  stature  of  a  single  child.  The  agency  of  the  pa- 
rents, is  indeed  the  antecedent  to  the  operation,  which 
conforms  the  body  and  increases  the  stature  of  the  child; 
but  makes  no  part  of  the  operation  itself.  If  Howard 
the  philanthropist,  beholding  a  Chinese  parent,  about  to 
commit  his  new  born  infant  to  the  waves,  had  addressed 
him  thus:  ''Do  not  destroy,  but  rear  the  sweet  and  ten- 
der babe,"  who  would  liave  siipposed,  that  the  good 
man  intended  to  intimate,  that  the  father  would  co  ope- 
rate with  the  divine  agency,  in  conveying  the  food  ta- 
ken by  the  child,  through  the  different  parts  of  his  sys- 
tem; and  in  all  the  varied,  intricate,  and  mysterious 
process,  by  which  the  miniature  frame  of  the  infant, 
woidd  be  increased  to  the  vigor  and  stature  of  a  man! 
Therefore  every  one  speaking  as  the  oracles  of  God^ 
will  say,  and  every  christian  preacher  ought  to  say,  that 
when  the  Spirit  exhorts  Work  out  your  own  salvation^ 
he  means,  come  to  Christ,  that  God  may  work  in  you  botk 
to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure;  when  he  com- 
mands, arise  from  the  dead^  he  intends,  come  to  Christ, 
that  the  Spirit  may  quicken  you  who  are  dead  in  tres- 
passes and  sins;  when  he  warns  to  flee  from  the  wrath 
to  come,  he  requires  you  to  go  to  Christ,  that  he  may 
deliver  you  from  the  wrath  to  come;  and  finally,  when 
he  commands  to  make  you  a  new  heart,  and  a  new  spirit^ 
he  directs,  to  come  to  Christ,  that  the  Holy  Comforter 
may  may  give  you  a  nerv  heart  and  put  within  you  a 
new  spirit.'^  With  this  application  of  these  two  clas- 
ses of  texts,  confusion  and  contradiction  vanish,  and 
when  the  sinner  is  exhorted,  he  has  a  definite  duty  pre- 
sented to  his  view.  But  who  that  teaches  him,  that  in 
the  change  by  which  he  becomes  a  new  creature,  he 
must  co-operate  with  the  Almighty,  exhibits  before  him 
any  tangible,  visible,  or  comprehensible  duty?  If  the 
nature  of  the  operation,  be  as  incomprehensible,  as  the 
movements  of  the  wind;  of  which  we  can  only  say,  ^'we 

•^See  No.  2  throughout 


283 

hear  the  sound  thereof  but  can  not  tell  whence  it  Com- 
eth or  whither  it  goeth/'  who  can  describe  the  sinner's 
duty  in  this  assumed  co-operation?  He  therefore,  who 
exhorts  sinners  to  co-operate  with  God  in  making  them- 
selves a  new  heart,  and  a  new  spirit,  exhorts  them  to  do 
he  cannot  tell  what!! 

And  finally^  Arminianism  in  teaching,  that  Christ  has 
made  atonement  and  redemption  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world,  assumes  a  position  unsupported  by  anv  one 
text  in  the  Bible;  and  of  conseqiience  it  must  be  mista- 
ken in  the  nature  of  the  atonement  and  rede^nption  of 
the  Saviour.  The  Arminian's  atoneinent  and  redemp- 
tion are  but  the  propitiation  taught  in  the  Bible.  It  is 
scriptural  to  say,  that  Christ  is  a  PROPITIATION  for 
the  sins  of  the  whole  world.  Ilo  propitiate  signifies  to 
appease.  The  scriptures  undeniably  teach,  that  God, 
through  Jesus  Christ,  is  so  far  appeased,  as  to  hold  all 
the  race  of  man  under  a  dispensation  of  mercy;  but  they 
no  where  intimate,  that  either  in  determination  or  in 
facAj  God  is  reconciled,  or  atoned  to  the  wicked,  or  that 
he  has  redeemed  them,  ''released  them  by  a  price  from 
the  penalties  of  their  sins.*'*  Aiid  thus  the  Arminian 
allows  no  meaning  to  such  texts  as  say:  '*In  Vv  horn  WE'' 
(saints  and  faithful  brethren  in  Christf)  ^'have  redemtion 
through  his  blood  even  the  remissions  cf  sins.''  ^^-IVE" 
(beloved  of  God  and  called  to  be  saintsj)  ^^also  joy  in 
God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  by  whom  WE  have 
now  received  the  atonement." 

The  teacher,  who  speaks  as  the  divine  oracles,  will 
not  suffer  the  shackles  of  a  cramped,  metaphysical  sys- 
tem, so  much  to  trammel  him,  as  not  to  give  the  fullest 
meaning,  sustained  by  the  most  literal  interpretation  of 
every  text,  which  relates  to  the  extent  of  the  Redeemer's 
mediation.  He  will  say,  that  as  God  co- eternally  with 
forming  his  plan  of  mercy,  foreknew,  who  would  and  who 
would  not,  come  to  Christ,  so  he  determined  that  the  Lord's 
death  should  be  a  RANSOM,  and  a  PROPFIIATION 
for  all  men,  but  an  ATONEMENT,  and  REDEMP^ 

♦See  No.  4.      fCol.  i,  2,        |Rom.  i,  7, 


284 

TION,  for  those  whom  he  co-eternally  foresaw,  as  com- 
ing to  Christ,  obtaining  spiritual  life,  and  savingly  be- 
lieving the  Gospel. 

It  is  soHietiines  imagined,  that  by  denying  an  eter' 
nal  and  particular  election,  and  a  limited  atonement, 
and  redemption,  the  Arminian  renders  the  Christian 
system  more  simple,  and  as  a  consequence,  more  easily 
understood.  Supposing  the  observation  to  be  true,  it 
argues  badly  for  the  verity  of  Arminianism.  The  Bible 
teaches  us,  that  some  of  its  own  truths  are  hard*  to  be 
understood.  A  system  therefore,  which  involves  na 
such  truths,  may  be  simple,  and  easily  comprehended, 
but  it  can  not  be  a  system  which  embraces  all  the  grand 
doctrines  revealed  in  the  Scriptures.  He  who  infers 
the  truth  of  the  Arminian  theory  from  this  professed 
simplicity,  arg\ies  very  little  more  wisely,  than  the 
cluld,  who  after  tearing  out  all  the  difficult  lessons  from 
his  school  book,  should  suppose  now  its  contents  being 
more  simple,  more  readily  learned,  and  more  easily  com- 
prehended, it  is  preferable  to  those  of  his  fellows. 

Speaking  as  the  oracles  of  God,  will  also  demolish  all 
the  difficulties  and  scriptural  discrepancies  of  philo- 
sophical Calvinism. 

This  theological  philosoi)hy  supposes  the  determina- 
tions of  God  to  be  the  foundation  and  the  antecedent  of 
his  forcdnowledge;  and,  that  although,  he  might  have 
created  and  governed  the  moral  universe  so  as  to  have 
preserved  it  for  ever  sinless,  and  uninterruptedly  hap- 
py; yet  for  the  manifestation  of  his  justice  and  mercy, 
he  preferred  that  the  system,  should  be  so  created  as  to 
produce  the  certain  sum  of  sin  and  misery  which  actually 
exists. 

Tbe  corollary  of  this  doctrine,  is,  that  God  is  the  Au- 
thor of  sin.  Not  more  so  indeed,  than  he  is  made  by 
the  Arminian  philosophy;  but  still  visibly,  and  undenia- 
blv  so.  And  just  as  visibly  and  undeniably,  is  this  co- 
rollary at  war  v\ith  these  words  of  revelation,  '^^O  do 
not  the  abominable  thing  that  I  hate.'^   ^^The  just  Lord 

•ii  P.  Ill,  16, 


28a 

"will  not  do  iniquity.''  "God  can  not  be  tempted  of  evil 
neither  tempteth  he  any  man.^'  This  philosophical 
dogma,  so  obviously  antiscriptural,  is  also  at  variance 
with  the  Presbyterian  philosophical  Calvinist's  own 
creed,  which  testifies:  "Neither  is  God  the  author  of 
sin." 

He  adopts  this  uncomely  tenet,  not  because  he  finds 
it  contained  in  the  language  of  sacred  writ;  but  because 
he  supposes  it  to  be  the  inevitable  consequence  of  the 
scriptural  truth,  that  God  "worketh  all  things  after  the 
counsel  of  his  own  will;  and,  that  the  Lord  reigneth  and 
doeth  his  will  in  the  armies  of  heaven  and  among  the  in- 
habitants of  the  earth.'^ 

This  discrepance,  he  who  speaks  as  the  oracles  of  God 
will  remove;  and  these  apparently  opposing  texts,  will 
he  reconcile,  when  he  teaches,  thatco-eternally,  andco- 
incidentally,  with  his  infinite  foreknowledge  of  all  e- 
vents,  Deity  chose,  that  system  of  moral  creation,  which 
his  unerring  wisdom  dictated,  to  be  best  adapted  to  pro- 
duce the  most  obedience  and  felicity,  and  the  least  trans- 
gression and  suffering.  So  that,  whilst  on  the  one  hand, 
he  will  hold  it,  as  true,  and  reasonable,  that  ruling  in  the 
armies  of  heaven,  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  earth, 
and  working  all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will, 
he  chose  to  create  and  govern  the  universe  as  it  first  ex- 
isted, and  as  it  now  exists;  on  the  other,  he  will  pro- 
claim it  equally  true,  and  equally  reasonable,  that  hating 
sin  as  an  abominable  thing,  and  having  no  pleasure  in 
the  death  of  the  wicked,  God  chose  to  create  and  go- 
vern it,  as  the  universe  in  which  there  is  the  least possi- 
ble  sin  and  death. 

This  philosophy  also,  whilst  it  scripturally  recogni- 
zes the  death  ofChrist  as  designed  in  God's  eternal  plan, 
and  actually  made  by  appropriation  in  time,  atonement 
zx\A  redemption  to  only  those  who  believe;  yet  in  many 
cases  denies  the  ransom,  and  the  propitiation,  which 
the  Saviour  has  made  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world. 
This  is  undeniably  opposed  to  the  literal  acceptation  of 
such  Scriptures  as  teach,  that  Christ  gave  "himself  a 


286 

ransom  for  all  to  be  testified  in  due  time;''  and  that  he  is 
''*the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  but  also 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world." 

This  Scriptural  contradiction  can  never  thwart  the 
way  of  the  Christian  preacher,  who  exhibiting  the  ora- 
cles  of  God  in  the  most  obvious  signification,  will  teach, 
that  while  Deity  in  his  eternal  plan  of  moral  government, 
determiued,  that  the  death  of  Christ  should  be  atone- 
ment iind7'edemf)tio?i  for  such  only,  asco-eternally  with 
the  formation  of  his  plan,  he  foresaw  coming  to  Christ, 
he  also  decreed  it  to  be  a  ransom  and  a  propitiation 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.  This  is  the  manner  in 
which  the  Scriptures  most  literally  and  obviously  inter- 
preted, constantly  represent  the  Saviour's  death. 

This  metaphysical  philosophy  also  su))poses  no  cer- 
tain connexion  to  be  constituted  between  any  endea- 
vours of  the  unregenerate  man,  and  his  receiving  the 
spirit  of  regeneration.  Because  the  testimony  of  sa- 
cred writ,  is  that  the  thoughts  and  sacrifices  of  the  wic- 
ked, and  the  prayer  of  him  that  turneth  away  his  ear 
from  hearing  the  law,  are  an  abomination  to  God;  and, 
that  if  I  regard  iniquity  in  my  heart,  the  Lord  will  not 
hear  me,  it  is  inft:rred  by  the  advocates  of  this  doctrine, 
that  the  unrenewed  man  has  no  warrant  to  suppose  any 
divineiy  appointed  means  in  the  use  of  which  he  can 
successfully  seek  a  new  heart.  All  this  argument  is 
based  on  the  supposition,  that  nothing  but  holy  prayers 
are  regarded  by  a  holy  God.  But  if  this  were  so,  w^hat 
petition  from  a  fallen  creature  of  earth,  co\ild  enter  the 
ears  of  the  holy,  holy,  holy.  Lord  God  of  Sabaoth? 
What  flesh  of  this  world  so  pure,  as  to  be  justified,  when 
God  lays  judgment  to  the  line  and  righteousness  to  the 
plummet? 

Let  us  examine  the  proofs  separately.  First  those 
texts  which  represent  the  thoughts  and  sacrifices  of  the 
wicked  an  abomination  to  Grod. 

Although  sin  is  universally  an  abomination  to  the  Holy 
One;  yet  he  has  revealed  mercy  for  sinners  and  for  the 
very  chief.  Although  the  sacrifices,  and  the  thoughts 
of  a  sinful  Mary  MagdAlene,  and  of  a  bloody  Manasseh, 


287 

were  an  abomination  to  Jehovah;  yet  he  visited  them 
with  his  rich  mercy;  cleansed  them  from  all  their  ini- 
quities; and  saved  them  with  a  great  salvation.  These 
Scriptures  indeed  prove,  that  God  surveys  sin  as  an  a- 
bomination;  but  not,  that  he  will  not  have  mercy  upon 
sinners.  To  prove  that  sin  is  the  object  of  divine  ha- 
tred is  one  thing,  and  to  prove  that  God  will  not  have 
mercy  upon  alarmed  and  seeking  transgressors  is  quite 
another. 

Secondly,  Let  us  examine  those  texts,  which  say,  ^^He 
that  turneth  away  his  ear  from  hearing  the  law  even  his 
prayer  shall  be  abomination;'^  and,  '^if  I  regard  iniquity 
in  my  heart  the  Lord  will  not  hear  me.''  Here  are  par- 
ticular classes  of  sinners  described:  those  who  w  ill  not  hear 
the  law  and  those  who  regard  (revolve  or  meditate)  ini- 
quity in  their  hearts.  Now  does  the  anxious  sinner,  w  ho 
has  been  alarmed  by  the  threatenings  of  the  law;  and 
who  calls  for  help  to  escape  from  the  wrath  to  come,  fall 
under  either  of  these  denominations?  He  indeed  sees 
no  beauty  in  holiness;  yet  seized  by  the  terrors  of  future 
wrath,  and  pierced  by  the  arrows  of  the  Almighty,  he 
turns  not  away  his  ear  from  hearing  the  law;  but  hears 
it  with  fear  and  trembling.  He  indeed  finds  not  in  his 
heart  to  love  God,  yet  fearing,  lest  iniquity  should  be 
his  ruin,  he  -regards,  revolves,  or  meditates  the  way  of 
escape;  and  therefore,  does  not  regard,  revolve,  or  me- 
ditate, in  his  heart  the  pursuit  of  iniquity.  These  texts 
at  the  most,  prove  only,  that  the  thoughts,  prayer  and 
sacrifices  of  those  w ho  desire  not  either  from  the  princi- 
ple of  love,  or  of  fear,  to  lay  aside  their  sins,  and  who 
when  they  make  any  acknowledgement  to  their  Maker 
at  all,  oiler  him  but  an  hypocritical  service,  are  unhee- 
ded by  the  Author  of  mercies  and  the  hearer  of  prayer. 

Again,  this  doctrine  is  also  argued  from  such  texts  as 
teach,  that  the  sons  of  God  are  born,  not  of  blood,  or  of 
the  will  of  the  flesh,  or  of  the  will  of  man:  but  of  (iod. 
These  words  of  holy  w  rit,  and  others  of  the  same  class 
indeed  teach  us,  that  the  renewing  by  which  a  man 
passes  from  death  unto  life,  and  becomes  a  new  creature, 


288 

is  exclusively  God's;  and  denies  all  human  co-opera- 
tion; but  gives  us  no  designation  of  the  character  of  the 
antecedents  to  this  operation,  or  of  the  agency  by  which 
they  are  produced. 

Thus  the  most  literal  exegesis  of  these  scriptures  with- 
out in  the  least  limiting  their  meaning  by  a  comparison 
with  others,  affords  not  the  smallest  support  for  the  doc- 
trine; whilst  to  say  nothing  of  its  discrepance  with  such 
scriptural  exhortations  as  say:  ^^ Arise  from  the  dead; 
•^flee  from  the  wrath  to  oome;'^  ^'make  you  a  new  heart 
and  a  new  spirit;''  and  of  its  incongruity  with  the  whole 
tenour  of  God's  dispensations  to  sinful  men;  and  not  to 
name  the  appalling  consequences  to  which  it  inevitably 
conducts  us,  it  is  sufficient  for  its  refutation  to  repeat 
the  language  of  the  Saviour:  ^^Ask  and  it  shall  be  given 
you;"  '^seek  and  ye  shall  find;'"'  ^^knock  and  it  shall  be 
opened  unto  you."  But  lest  any  should  suppose  that 
this  is  addressed  to  such  only,  as  can  ask  with  a  holy 
prayer,  and  that  anxious  sinners  are  excluded,  the  Redee- 
mer also  says  ^'EVERY  one  that  asketh  receiveth." 

This  Scriptural  contradiction  disappears  in  the  prea- 
ching of  him  who  speaks  as  the  oracles  of  God.  To  pro- 
duce the  greatest  amount  of  ha])piness,  he  will  teach,  is 
the  proper  object  of  infiuite  goodness.  This  can  be 
produced,  only  by  the  existence  of  a  system  of  intelli 
gent  and  voluntary  beings.  Composed  of  finite  beings 
in  the  perfection  of  their  nature  not  exempt  from  error 
in  judgment,  and  consequent  error  in  choice,  any  such 
system,  is  liable  to  a  greater  or  a  less  degree  of  sin  and 
its  attendant  misery.  As  an  infinitely  good  being,  God 
therefore,  chose  not  only  an  intelligent  and  moral  system, 
but  one  the  very  best  of  its  kind — one,  in  which,  al- 
though there  is  a  liability  to  evil;  yet  a  liability  to  the 
least  possible.  Co  eternally  with  the  ado])tion  of  this 
best  plan,  Deity  foreknowing,  who  among  the  genera- 
tions of  Adanvs  children  would  come  to  the  Saviour, 
and  who  would  not,  determined,  without  any  uncertain- 
ty or  conditionality,  to  grant  to  those  coming,  power  to 
become  the  sons  of  God.  And  as  he  believes  this  com- 
ing to  Christ  consists  in  the  importunate  and  persevering 


289 

seeking  of  an  anxious  sinner,  he  will  teach,  that  there  is 
a  divinely  constituted  and  infallible  connexion,  between 
seeking  and  finding  grace  to  become  a  new  man  and  a 
spiritual  christian. 

2.  Speaking  on  these  topics  as  the  oracles  of  God,  if 
universally  adopted,  ivould  remove  the  principal  causes 
of  difference  between  all  Trinitarians,  loho  hold  the 
the  eternity  of  future  rewards  and  punishments. 

If  the  views  of  doctrines  exhibited  in  these  discour- 
ses, be  as  the  oracles  of  God,  surely,  in  adopting  them, 
neither  Arminians,  nor  Calvinists  have  any  thing  to  lose; 
but  every  thing  to  gain.  If  the  doctrine  of  God's  free 
mercy  to  all  men,  he  secured  to  the  Arminian,  what  can 
he  lose  by  admitting,  that  the  All  Wise  has  eternally 
planned  every  event  in  the  universe,  according  to  the 
wisest  and  best  counsel?  And  if  it  be  granted,  that  the 
Spirit  is  freely  given  to  all  who  ask  him,  what  loss  can 
be  sustained  in  believing,  that  this  Spirit  himself  re- 
news the  sinner,  withowi  diHy  human  co  operation?  And 
if  Christ's  propitiation  (all  that  appears  to  be  meant  by 
the  Arminian's  atonement  and  redemption)  for  the  sins 
of  the  whole  world,  be  acknowledged,  what  injury  in 
supposing,  that  God  eternally  designed  the  Saviour's 
death  really  to  become  in  time,  atonement  and  redemp- 
tion to  none  but  those  who  believe? 

Again,  if  the  Scriptural  doctrine  that  God  worketh 
all  things  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  will,  be 
retained,  why  should  it  be  any  offence,  to  the  Calvinist 
to  believe  the  Scriptures  literally,  which  teach,  that  God 
would  rather,  that  none  should  perish;  but  that  all 
should  come  to  repentance?  If  it  be  admitted,  that  the 
work  of  renewing  them  who  are  dead  in  trespasses 
and  sins,  is  exclusively  the  Spirits;  what  if  it  should  be 
also  held,  that  God  gives  his  Spirit  to  all,  even  to  the 
anxious  unregenerate  who  ask  it?  And  finally,  if  Christ's 
death  be  exhibited,  as  it  is  scripturally  taught  to  be, 
atonement  and  redemption  to  those  only  who  believe, 
what  fatal  danger  in  proclaiming  it  also  a  sufficient  ran^ 
som  and  an  actual  propitiation^  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 

27 


290 

world?  Where  now  the  loss  to  either  party  in  adopting 
the  doctrines  which  are  here  supposed  to  he  taught  in 
speaking  as  the  oracles  of  God?  Nothing,  absolutely 
nothing  is  lost,  but  what  is  a  deformity  and  an  incum- 
brance to  any  system,  and  the  avoiding  of  many  difficul- 
ties is  gained. 

He  who  would  speak  as  the  oracles  of  God^  will  view 
the  temple  of  divine  truth,  not  from  a  location,  from 
which  he  can  survey  only  a  solitary  side  or  part;  but 
he  will  go  all  around  the  sacred  edifice,. and  taking  his 
stand,  now  in  the  vale  below;  now  in  a  horizontal  range: 
and  again  on  the  mountain  clift  above,  in  all  its  various 
aspects  he  will  familiarize  his  eye  with  its  front,  and  rear, 
and  both  its  ends,  with  its  pillars  and  its  colonnades,  its 
arches  and  its  domes;  and  although,  to  every  particular 
site  it  presents  widely  different  phases,  he  will  discover 
a  beautiful  correspondence  in  the  parts,  and  feel  his  soul 
elevated  by  the  glorious  symmetry  and  transcendent 
grandeur  of  the  whole.  And  although  he  will  find,  that 
after  all,  his  mortal  sight  can  not  explore  the  depth  of  its 
foundations,  laid  in  the  abyss  of  eternity;  or  penetrate 
the  inmost  sanctuary,  the  holy  of  holies,  to  feed  his  cu- 
riosity on  the  arcana  of  the  Most  High;  yet  he  will  learn, 
that  the  misty  clouds  which  once  appeared  to  hang  a- 
round,  covering  all  but  a  favourite  part  with  the  shades 
of  deep  and  awful  mystery,  and  exhibiting  a  legion  of 
unsightly  and  contradictory  shapes,  have  vanished,  and, 
that  on  mount  Zion  illumined  by  the  Sun  of  righteous- 
ness stands  a  beauteous  temple  of  God. 


END  OF  VOLUME  I. 


